RedbirdSoxFan
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2017
- Messages
- 3,817
Bird Friend said:
And they are gone now.
Bulletin board material
- Thread starter Bird Friend
- Start date
And they are gone now.
Bird Friend
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2017
- Messages
- 12,570
- Thread starter
- #22
RedbirdSoxFan said:
If only they didn't have anybody to replace them . . . but, they do. Williamson will do much more this year with his 45% from 3. They've added a juco guard who averaged 17.9/game, shooting 40% from 3 and 84% from the line. And they added a 3+ star post to compete with Krutwig.
Now I'm not saying we can't beat them, but to assume we will is probably a bit ambitious.
RedbirdSoxFan
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2017
- Messages
- 3,817
Bird Friend said:
Too bad Illinois State doesn’t have any good players coming in.
RedbirdSoxFan said:
Hey RedbirdSoxFan (I do love that you like the Sox - I do too).....but do you remember when Jordan and Pippen outscored Isaiah and Dumars for like 4 years in a row in the late 80s/early 90s? It’s kinda like that.
Team > Individuals.
Once we figure that out Loyola is in trouble.
Tick-tock though. We don’t get to keep Yarbrough and Fayne for 15 years
RedbirdSoxFan
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2017
- Messages
- 3,817
V Boy said:
Dumars & Thomas were not the reason the Bulls could not beat the Pistons. Bill Laimbeer, Dennis Rodman, & Vinnie Johnson were the reason. The Bulls could not matchup against them.
I will take a healthy & eligible; Fayne, Yarbrough, Evans, Tinsley, Copeland, Clarance, Jefferson, Idowu, Ndiaye, Bruninga, and Chastain against any lineup the Valley can put out there, including Loyola.
RedbirdSoxFan
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2017
- Messages
- 3,817
V Boy said:
Not sure what your point is, but my point is “I’m not worried about Loyola in 2018-19”
ChiRedbirdfan
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2017
- Messages
- 6,599
RedbirdSoxFan said:
Our 2018-19 'Birds have us all worked up and have a tremendous amount of promise. But there are some realistic concerns (at this moment in time) about Redbirds hoops truly being an NCAA tourney quality team next season such as:
1. Is Copeland as good as all the hype and more importantly will he be and remain eligible?
2. Can one our young Fayne back-up newcomers (Reye/NDiayne) ,with no college experience, rise to the occasion? We only need one of the two to step up...however we need one of the two to step up materially vs each marginally stepping up.
3. Can ISU get away from being a 3 player team threat, such as this past season, and truly be a 5+ player team threat? If ISU ends up with MY, PF and KE being the dominate scorers like this past season then ISU will again be marginal at best.
4. Who will be the leader of this team? Yarbrough to date has proven he is not reliable nor is he a leader by action...Fayne is a silent force but does not seem like the type to openly lead/inspire others..? Evans too is a silent force and a solid role player but also does not seem like the one to lead and inspire others? We do need one of these two to step up and be a leader of the team vs seemingly sitting idle and allowing Yarbrough to be the flawed leader he has been.
5. Can the collective talent of the '18/19 Redbird basketball roster be greater than the individual parts? Team chemistry is the biggest unknown as this point for next season.
6. Can Muller have this team ready for the opening game vs coming out of the gate slowly? Recently this has been a challenge for Muller coached teams.
I am excited about this Redbird team and understand all the hype. However I am willing to admit that the Ramblers are a full level above the rest of the MVC including ISU wether we like to admit it or not. ISU DOES SEEM TO HAVE THE TALENT/PIECES TO COMPETE WITH LOYOLA BUT CAN THE TALENT/PIECES BECOME A TEAM. I do not gamble as a rule but I am willing to take bets against any ISU fans that don't believe Loyola is the number 1 preseason favorite and/or will have a better MVC record than ISU next year. Sorry to say it and hope I am wrong but strongly disagree with those that feel Loyola is nothing to worry about next season.
ChiRedbirdfan
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2017
- Messages
- 6,599
V Boy said:
:text-+1: He really did.
ekeyfanclub
Member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2017
- Messages
- 693
I get that Loyola had a very good season last year, but I find it really hard to believe that they are a full level ahead of us and the rest of the MVC. I still think they will be very good next year but they have to dominate the Valley for a few years like the Shockers did before I would even consider them a full level ahead of the rest of the conference. This was the first season they were even in the top 4 in the conference. I like Moser but he does not have a long track record of success.ChiRedbirdfan said:
I think that both ISU and Loyola should be the favorites next season. I think it is fair to say ISU should be better this season and Loyola should be a little worse. ISU brings back almost everyone and added a lot of talent. Loyola brings back a lot of talent but also loses Jackson, Ingram, and Richardson. I think of all those players Jackson will be the hardest to replace. He was a defensive matchup nightmare who really hurt us last year.
It should be a great race. Clearly both teams have a great chance to win the conference.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
ChiRedbirdfan
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2017
- Messages
- 6,599
ekeyfanclub said:
Agree it should be a fun season and also agree with all of your other comments except I believe Loyola will be a better team at the start of the 18-19 season than they were at the start of the 17-18 season which puts them above ISU until ISU actually shows up/lives up to expectations. The question is can the 18-19 Loyola team end up playing as well as the 17-18 Loyola team finished playing? I believe that Loyola is, unfortunately for ISU, every bit as good as they were last year and that team was one of the best MVC teams we have seen in quite some time.
RedbirdSoxFan
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2017
- Messages
- 3,817
ChiRedbirdfan said:
Seems to me that you have no point, other than if Loyola ends up being better than Illinois State next season you can say “I told you so”, and if Illinois State ends up being better than Loyola (which I am already saying they will) because of the top ten players being healthy AND eligible, You can say “I told you Illinois State would not beat Loyola unless they got better play from other players other than the Big Three”.
Or is It that Illinois State doesn’t have anyone capable of stopping Loyola’s Big three, and you are sticking to that?
ChiRedbirdfan
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2017
- Messages
- 6,599
RedbirdSoxFan said:
Just what I said....Loyola is the team to beat in my opinion and your notion that they are nothing to worry about is unrealistic given what they return plus some good new players. Best current estimate of the likelihood of winning the MVC next season :
Loyola 45%
ISU 25%
SIU 15%
Bradley 5%
remainder 10%
Tough to put a precise number down especially at this time but seems something close to these percentages. Maybe Loyola is 40% and ISU is 30% but in my mind clearly Loyola is the team to beat.
SoCalRedbird
Active member
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2017
- Messages
- 1,120
I tend to agree that Loyola is the team to beat, but it has more to do with two decades worth of watching ISU basketball fall short of expectations.ChiRedbirdfan said:
I'll take our talent over Loyola's. I'll take our experience over Loyola's. I'll take our coaching staff over Loyola's.
But...
LU 71, ISU 66 on Arch Madness Sunday. No matter how the season plays out, (we could sweep the conference schedule!) I'd keep that prediction until we get over the NCAA tourney hump.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
One team one goal is the only way to beat Loyola.
Comparing returning players points scored and rebounds is exactly what Loyola wants our players to think and care about.
ISU would probably be better this year if Fayne points dipped and Evans points dipped and Copeland, Tinsley and Clarance were all around 10 ppg.
If we are overly reliant on Fayne and Evans to takes a lot of shots and to score 15-18 ppg then I would guess we will not win the league.
We need more players to score by getting high percentage shots.
Comparing returning players points scored and rebounds is exactly what Loyola wants our players to think and care about.
ISU would probably be better this year if Fayne points dipped and Evans points dipped and Copeland, Tinsley and Clarance were all around 10 ppg.
If we are overly reliant on Fayne and Evans to takes a lot of shots and to score 15-18 ppg then I would guess we will not win the league.
We need more players to score by getting high percentage shots.
Bird Friend
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2017
- Messages
- 12,570
- Thread starter
- #36
V Boy said:
I agree. And MY has the ability to facilitate this. We need him to take better care of the ball and focus on his passing. His points will come. But the more he can find the open shooter or driver from the block, the easier it'll be for him get buckets for himself. We need someone to step up on the block for when MY needs a rest or has foul trouble.
V Boy said:
I agree, you never want to be heavily reliant on any one, two, or three players. Basketball is very much a team game. However, it would be silly not to let Phil, who shot almost 60% from the floor last year, to get a whole lot of touches within the flow of the game/offense. I don't ever remember going "why did you shoot that" with Phil. It's more the hope that Phil won't HAVE to play 30+ minutes to consistently be in that situation and needed to score.
Key on the other hand shot 41% from 3 last season. Yes, some of them were early in the shot clock, but shooting at a high rate like that, no coach is going take away the green light. Again, this comes down to the hope that Muller will be able to trust the other role players more and not have Key play 30+.
So yes, hopefully their ppg production goes down slightly, but that would mean that there is more trust in the role players. If you remember the offense last season when one of the "big three" wasn't on the court, it got stagnant. That happens with every team in the country when the leaders aren't on the court.
Milik is going to get his every game because no one in the MVC proved they could stop him. He'll be in the 17/19 ppg
Phil will probably stay in that 15 range, Key, I'm guessing will be around 12.
Boogie will probably close to 10. He really needs to drive to the bucket next season! He showed 2-3 times this season that he can beat guards and forwards off the dribble for an easy layup. I remember one in the MVC Tournament in particular. He is so long and doesn't use his length very often.
Copeland is expected to take Madison's starting role, so I would assume no less than 10 from him
Elijah, I think will get to about 6 (with 2019-20 as a breakout year).
Chastain maybe 7ish
Taylor 5ish,
Rey 2-3
Abdou 3-5
J.Jeff- 6ish.
Obviously, all of this is guess work, but I do see a lot more balance with this team with the same leaders in the club house in Milik, Phil, and Key. I'm probably too deep into the kool-aid but I expect each of the top 10 to have some sort of an impact offensively. We'll be able to score the ball a lot more effectively and efficiently. The Birds will need to buy into defense on day one. That will be the thing that makes the difference in the early, really tough non-con.
RedbirdSoxFan
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2017
- Messages
- 3,817
Adunk33 said:
If Copeland is taking Boogie’s starting spot, who is taking Madison’s?
The way Boogie played the last 7-8 games of the season, if he is not a starter, this must be a very good team.