Developing Jay Stewart in game might be reasonable

[Connecticut13]

I wouldn't be against sending a message. But anyone thinking it's "tough to perform much worse" are clueless. If that's the case, just play Andrew Hurley.

It can obviously get worse by playing a walk-on. I'm talking about playing a Top-50 recruit who, just two games ago, Hurley said played himself into the rotation. So, this is someone the coach has just recently said deserves to be on the floor.

Also - as to playing walk-ons - I remember Jim Calhoun putting Jason Baisch in against Oklahoma to prove a point. I understand Hurley's a different sort of coach who is trying to build up his players in-game rather than proving a point by putting an unproven player or even a walk-on in -- but man, last night was embarrassing and it kind of felt warranted.

 

[notEwekon]

You two are going down the same path defending the RJ Cole years of middling records and first round NCAA exits. And it's not a good look for either of you.

There is no harm losing by 27 instead of 15 when it was obvious the seven healthy players out of the 9-man rotation were not getting the job done.

From a literal stand point of "it could be worse", you are both right. Putting in end of rotation or bench players and losing by more than what the final score ended up being is "worse". From the practical stand point, it was a blowout loss and the actual score doesn't change a thing about what happened in the first 30 minutes.

Put me squarely in the group with everyone else in thread but you two. When everything you've tried hasn't worked, go with a different plan. Worst thing that can happen is you find another way of not succeeding.

I'll be very interested in seeing what happens Saturday night at XL. Hurley and his staff have a lot of leeway after figuring out last season and completing an epic run in the NCAA tourney. The conversation is no longer about whether or not they have the smarts and ability to communicate to their players how to succeed. It is obvious when teams go with the strategy of drive everything all the time from every player, Hurley has struggled with mid-game adjustments.

I naively believe we can all agree that DH has a plan for developing his players.

Many of the arguments in favor of playing Jaylin suppose the only reason he isn't getting burn is because Hurley doesn't like him as an option, which is an absurd notion.

An embarrassment at SH is a really good trade for staying on the path with this kid because if he's not developed into a contributor by January then I don't like their chances in a tournament.

 

[tykurez]

But it can. Which is why he wasn't playing.

I was pissed at Hurley the year he didn’t play the freshman and then they transferred but it was pretty obvious he was right. So I’m done questioning what they see in practice.

 

[notEwekon]

It can obviously get worse by playing a walk-on. I'm talking about playing a Top-50 recruit who, just two games ago, Hurley said played himself into the rotation. So, this is someone the coach has just recently said deserves to be on the floor.

Also - as to playing walk-ons - I remember Jim Calhoun putting Jason Baisch in against Oklahoma to prove a point. I understand Hurley's a different sort of coach who is trying to build up his players in-game rather than proving a point by putting an unproven player or even a walk-on in -- but man, last night was embarrassing and it kind of felt warranted.

In my fantasy where I'm a coach and my team is mailing it in I leave them on the floor to suffer until the final buzzer and then we watch the game replay on the bus ride home

 

[T-Squared]

But it can. Which is why he wasn't playing.

So he gets blown by on two or three trips down the floor. Same thing was happening to Alex. It would give Stewart some Big East minutes - something that all the freshmen need to understand what it takes to win a rock fight.

 

[Edward Sargent]

You two are going down the same path defending the RJ Cole years of middling records and first round NCAA exits. And it's not a good look for either of you.

There is no harm losing by 27 instead of 15 when it was obvious the seven healthy players out of the 9-man rotation were not getting the job done.

From a literal stand point of "it could be worse", you are both right. Putting in end of rotation or bench players and losing by more than what the final score ended up being is "worse". From the practical stand point, it was a blowout loss and the actual score doesn't change a thing about what happened in the first 30 minutes.

Put me squarely in the group with everyone else in thread but you two. When everything you've tried hasn't worked, go with a different plan. Worst thing that can happen is you find another way of not succeeding.

I'll be very interested in seeing what happens Saturday night at XL. Hurley and his staff have a lot of leeway after figuring out last season and completing an epic run in the NCAA tourney. The conversation is no longer about whether or not they have the smarts and ability to communicate to their players how to succeed. It is obvious when teams go with the strategy of drive everything all the time from every player, Hurley has struggled with mid-game adjustments.

I agree we should have gone with a different plan once DC went out. Funneling guards into a fairly non existent center was the original plan which should have been scrapped. Hall took 8 threes and made 3 and that was a very good shooting night for them!

 

[husky429]

I was pissed at Hurley the year he didn’t play the freshman and then they transferred but it was pretty obvious he was right. So I’m done questioning what they see in practice.

In two years I hope someone re-opens this thread and I can point fingers at all the mouthbreathers who think they know better than our exceptional coaching staff. It's laughable.

 

[Scrappy3]

PT is the last thing we should complain about. I say this every year. We have 10% of the data the coaches have on these guys at best.

We don't see Jaylin in practice every day. If he's not playing in games we need to make a comeback, it's because the staff--with 50x more evidence than all of us--believe he isn't able to contribute. And for a good reason considering how bar Alex was yesterday.

I understand they see him in practice--but a real game has a chance for a lightbulb moment. Hit a big shot make a big defensive play--bring energy. He makes a couple positives and you might get a lightbulb to come on--every player has them. Give him a chance--no reason not to. We invested a lot in Stewart--lets use him when we can. Castle and Ball are getting the chance

 

[gtcam]

I was pissed at Hurley the year he didn’t play the freshman and then they transferred but it was pretty obvious he was right. So I’m done questioning what they see in practice.

It's not what DH has said about seeing in practice - he has repeatedly said publicly that Stewart has earned game play with his practice. Stewart makes a mistake on a defensive switch vs Gonzaga and he yanks him. Nobody on that court in a black jersey last night gave an effort on defense yet Stewart doesn't deserve a look. DH being the double talk DH, again. The team was poor and the coaching was poor - bottom line.
It's one game and I am not panicking now but let's hope it isn't going to be a trend - St Johns and Pitino are not going to be easy at all.

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

It's not what DH has said about seeing in practice - he has repeatedly said publicly that Stewart has earned game play with his practice. Stewart makes a mistake on a defensive switch vs Gonzaga and he yanks him. Nobody on that court in a black jersey last night gave an effort on defense yet Stewart doesn't deserve a look.

This is the thing that bothers me as well. It’s one thing to have that standard, but if you’re going to have that standard for him, have it for everyone.

It’s hard to tell someone they aren’t playing because of xyz while they look at other players also doing xyz. Spencer has been beaten on defense consistently most of the year. Newton has had his moments as well. To then have the highest no nonsense standard for a freshman trying to get his feet under him is not conducive to his confidence or development. It’s setting him up for failure to have that high of a standard that others are not held to.

 

[HuskyHawk]

In two years I hope someone re-opens this thread and I can point fingers at all the mouthbreathers who think they know better than our exceptional coaching staff. It's laughable.

Our exception coaching staff screwed up. Team was unprepared, game plan was terrible, execution was terrible, adjustments were terrible. Doesn't mean they aren't a great staff, just means they were just as bad the players last night. I don't think Hurley would even argue the point.

 

[Rico444]

This is the thing that bothers me as well. It’s one thing to have that standard, but if you’re going to have that standard for him, have it for everyone.

It’s hard to tell someone they aren’t playing because of xyz while they look at other players also doing xyz. Spencer has been beaten on defense consistently most of the year. Newton has had his moments as well. To then have the highest no nonsense standard for a freshman trying to get his feet under him is not conducive to his confidence or development. It’s setting him up for failure to have that high of a standard that others are not held to.

Getting beaten on defense is one thing. In the Gonzaga game, Stewart only had 2 or 3 defensive possessions and in one of them he had a bust that lead to an easy layup. That kind of stuff can't happen on a regular basis.

 

[HHusky]

Karaban played so poorly last night. Stewart (also a 4) should have seen time if only looking to next year. Were going to need BOTH guys this season and shared playing time at the 4 next season.

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

Getting beaten on defense is one thing. In the Gonzaga game, Stewart only had 2 or 3 defensive possessions and in one of them he had a bust that lead to an easy layup. That kind of stuff can't happen on a regular basis.

I agree it can’t happen on a regular basis. But we don’t even know if it will if he only gets one chance at a mistake. Mistakes are suppose to be teaching moments not times to punish someone.

 

[REB1094]

Alex really didn't have anything going last night, but I think the staff has earned the benefit of the doubt

Samson Johnson stuck it out and is now an impactful player so far this season. Guys like Hawkins and Andre aren't great comparisons because they got minutes freshman year, but they are examples of what buying into this program can do for you. They're now millionaires in the NBA after 2-3 years, while being ranked pretty similarly to what Jaylin was in HS. There are examples of guys that didn't want to wait and left the program, just to end up in bad situations anyways (Rahsool & CFJ)

Also, Hurley is a computer nerd. Losing by 15 instead of 25 is better for the computers, even though both of those outcomes is just an embarrassing loss for fans

I'd like Jaylin to get minutes. We should have been up 20 late in the game against them so he could get his time. Didn't happen yesterday, but things will be better and he'll get his chance

 

[Rico444]

I agree it can’t happen on a regular basis. But we don’t even know if it will if he only gets one chance at a mistake. Mistakes are suppose to be teaching moments not times to punish someone.

I am sure Hurley isn't making these decisions based on one mistake. He sees these guys in practice every week.

 

[imno1]

We did a lot of complaining about PT that year, and at the end of the day, Hurley was right.

Diggins and Floyd weren't UConn-caliber players, and Johnson wasn't one until he took the couple years to develop and get stronger.

I hear ya and Hurley and staff are doing an amazing job but let me point to Whaley as an example of someone who proved himself when he had to play out of necessity. I just feel it would have been good for Jaylin’s psyche. But I’m just a fan expressing my opinion.

 

[SeattleHoop]

Getting beaten on defense is one thing. In the Gonzaga game, Stewart only had 2 or 3 defensive possessions and in one of them he had a bust that lead to an easy layup. That kind of stuff can't happen on a regular basis.

Cam Spencer has been giving away more open lane drives than a toll booth

 

[notEwekon]

This is the thing that bothers me as well. It’s one thing to have that standard, but if you’re going to have that standard for him, have it for everyone.

It’s hard to tell someone they aren’t playing because of xyz while they look at other players also doing xyz. Spencer has been beaten on defense consistently most of the year. Newton has had his moments as well. To then have the highest no nonsense standard for a freshman trying to get his feet under him is not conducive to his confidence or development. It’s setting him up for failure to have that high of a standard that others are not held to.

Tbf people saying he was benched after missing a switch are telling less than the entire story.

At Gonzaga, I was expecting a security guard to take Jaylin off the floor for looking lost.

Jaylin and Cam freaking Spencer is not apples to apples.

 

[SeattleHoop]

In two years I hope someone re-opens this thread and I can point fingers at all the mouthbreathers who think they know better than our exceptional coaching staff. It's laughable.

Replying so I can come back to this post later.

No one thinks they know more than the staff. It’s okay to have suggestions and opinions for an organization that you love and you want to see succeed.

It is just pointing out small puzzle pieces that may be missing and trying to suggest how the staff might put it together. But it’s not questioning their ability to be able to do it as a whole.

 

[yungdowork]

You two are going down the same path defending the RJ Cole years of middling records and first round NCAA exits. And it's not a good look for either of you.

I'm not going to dive too deep into the rotation right now, but I just find takes like this so dismissive of RJ Cole, who is a huge reason the program is even close to where it is now. The "RJ Cole years" brought us back to the Big East, brought us back to the NCAA tournament, guys from last year credited him over and over for helping to build the culture. Without the RJ Coles and the Whaleys, there is no Castle, there is no "fab five," there is no national championship.

 

[notEwekon]

Cam Spencer has been giving away more open lane drives than a toll booth

I think if we start getting into win share statistics you'll end up barking up a different tree

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

I hear ya and Hurley and staff are doing an amazing job but let me point to Whaley as an example of someone who proved himself when he had to play out of necessity. I just feel it would have been good for Jaylin’s psyche. But I’m just a fan expressing my opinion.

Gaffney his freshman year did a great job as a starter and got us some wins when he had to play out of necessity too.

Some guys play better in games than in practice. Especially when they have the rope to play freely.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

In two years I hope someone re-opens this thread and I can point fingers at all the mouthbreathers who think they know better than our exceptional coaching staff. It's laughable.

Arguendo, you and @navery12 are right. What, therefore, accounts for both of you using the laughing emoji and repeated, self-certain, heavy-handed language?

Further still, for what imaginable positive purpose, would you jump first to "end of the bench," and subsequently to Andrew Hurley to counter well-meaning arguments that playing Jaylin Stewart in such a game couldn't result in things being any worse than what we saw?

I assert that you weaken your argument in both cases, and my cursory understanding of what your spouse does for a living leads me to imagine that she would agree, or at least disagree respectfully. The confidence that you have in your unyielding opinion ought to provide a firm foundation for at least a measure of open inquiry on suggested options that were not offered as pie-in-the-sky fantasy. What harm would there be in that?

Not all suggestions could be dismissed in toto as "revisionist nonsense," (not your phrase, but Navery's), but there is a heft to such rhetoric that might shut down additional discussion. In a more simplified sense, such quoted language strikes me as attempts to control the discussion and own the preferred point of view, as though it's the 'one true conclusion.' It might just be pugilistic posturing.

The remaining unaddressed question I have concerns perceivable reticence* to bring in Stewart expressly for the opportunity to preserve being able to work with an 8-man rotation after it was clear that Clingan would not be returning. Do you have any thoughts on this singularly-focused angle?

I don't claim any knowledge or speculation that an extended absence of Clingan (or not) was determined within the game, so I can't push my question as foundation for a hard opinion, but the question did occur to me. One way or another, we are likely to get some clues on the matter on Saturday in the St.John's game.

NB - My opening paragraphs sought to insulate me from complete dismissal by laying a foundation for an unasked & unanswered question. In my experience, it is unlikely that I am the only one to whom this line of thinking has occurred. That alone makes it worthy of consideration by a knowledgeable and respectful ally, which is somewhat of a base stance I impute to my fellow Husky fans.

* Finally, I noticed elsewhere in a Boneyard thread this morning, that the word "reticence" appeared as "redescence." I feel no need to 'dump on' the person (likely in non-aggressive ignorance) simply went with what the word sounds like, and might benefit from a gentle redirection. And here, I am offering this instance an example of an error that is verifiable, but avoids derision. My suggestion is that nearly all, "You're wrong, and you're an idiot"-type arguments deserve a longer leash among presumed cohorts, and that not to be so accommodating weakens the bonds that are needed among teammates.

I'm unthreatened by the possibility that down the line my posed question will unmask me as a fool. To be certain, I've already exposed myself to those so inclined as a tiresome, garrulous pedant, so, really, "How much worse could it get?"

 

[husky429]

Arguendo, you and @navery12 are right. What, therefore, accounts for both of you using the laughing emoji and repeated, self-certain, heavy-handed language?

Further still, for what imaginable positive purpose, would you jump first to "end of the bench," and subsequently to Andrew Hurley to counter well-meaning arguments that playing Jaylin Stewart in such a game couldn't result in things being any worse than what we saw?

I assert that you weaken your argument in both cases, and my cursory understanding of what your spouse does for a living leads me to imagine that she would agree, or at least disagree respectfully. The confidence that you have in your unyielding opinion ought to provide a firm foundation for at least a measure of open inquiry on suggested options that were not offered as pie-in-the-sky fantasy. What harm would there be in that?

Not all suggestions could be dismissed in toto as "revisionist nonsense," (not your phrase, but Navery's), but there is a heft to such rhetoric that might shut down additional discussion. In a more simplified sense, such quoted language strikes me as attempts to control the discussion and own the preferred point of view, as though it's the 'one true conclusion.' It might just be pugilistic posturing.

The remaining unaddressed question I have concerns perceivable reticence* to bring in Stewart expressly for the opportunity to preserve being able to work with an 8-man rotation after it was clear that Clingan would not be returning. Do you have any thoughts on this singularly-focused angle?

I don't claim any knowledge or speculation that an extended absence of Clingan (or not) was determined within the game, so I can't push my question as foundation for a hard opinion, but the question did occur to me. One way or another, we are likely to get some clues on the matter on Saturday in the St.John's game.

NB - My opening paragraphs sought to insulate me from complete dismissal by laying a foundation for an unasked & unanswered question. In my experience, it is unlikely that I am the only one to whom this line of thinking has occurred. That alone makes it worthy of consideration by a knowledgeable and respectful ally, which is somewhat of a base stance I impute to my fellow Husky fans.

* Finally, I noticed elsewhere in a Boneyard thread this morning, that the word "reticence" appeared as "redescence." I feel no need to 'dump on' the person (likely in non-aggressive ignorance) simply went with what the word sounds like, and might benefit from a gentle redirection. And here, I am offering this instance an example of an error that is verifiable, but avoids derision. My suggestion is that nearly all, "You're wrong, and you're an idiot"-type arguments deserve a longer leash among presumed cohorts, and that not to be so accommodating weakens the bonds that are needed among teammates.

I'm unthreatened by the possibility that down the line my posed question will unmask me as a fool. To be certain, I've already exposed myself to those so inclined as a tiresome, garrulous pedant, so, really, "How much worse could it get?"

Gonna need a TL;DR on this one brother.

The verbose writing is a bit much here. I generally enjoy your schtick, but I'm tired and injured. Gonna have to tone it down if you want to communicate with me today.

Don't change though. We need all kinds of kinds to make this place work.