Big Questions

[glm38]

IMHO I think WSU would have won several more conference games without the injuries. But I think what bearz77 was trying to say is there's no way to know that conclusively. Basketball is a funny game sometimes. Players can get unhappy with their playing time and or their roles on the team. Happens all the time and when it does it can be really destructive. Marshall seems to run a tight ship and commands a lot of respect so that probably doesn't happen but no way to know for sure.

I would almost think parceling out playing time and keeping everyone happy could be Marshall's biggest challenge this year? Nice problem to have though.

[Wufan]

I would almost think parceling out playing time and keeping everyone happy could be Marshall's biggest challenge this year? Nice problem to have though.

Seems that way every year. Looking back at the NIT championship team, this was the roster:

*Joe Ragland, Jr
Demetric Williams, So
David Kyles, Jr
*Toure Murry, Jr
Tyler Richardson, Fr (transferred the following year)
*Graham Hatch, Jr
Ben Smith, Jr
*Aaron Ellis, Sr
Gabe Blair, Sr
Jerome Hamilton, Fr (transferred the following year)
*JT Durley, Sr
Garret Stutz, Jr
Ehimen Orukpe, So

* indicates starter.
Pretty stout line-up to juggle. Every player that stayed was a starter their senior year except Gabe Blair and Demetric Williams.

[BEARZ77]

That's the year I was referring to, where WSU fans kept saying they had the two best teams in the conference, but still lost both times to MSU and took second in the conference. Shocker posters kept complaining that Marshall wasn't getting the right players on the court at crunch time, hinted several times about some division on the team between Stutz and others, and that they had not developed a go-to player like Weems. Those were points made on the Shocker board. Every Coach likes to have depth, but they will also tell you it's hard to keep 11-12 guys happy when they have pretty comparable abilities. I thought Marshall had trouble that year deciding what role he wanted for a number of players and they lost several close games when they had poor possessions late. There aren't as many tough decisions when you only go 8-9 deep.

[Wufan]

There aren't as many tough decisions when you only go 8-9 deep.

Yep. The decisions get tough again when you're only 6 deep though.

[BEARZ77]

There aren't as many tough decisions when you only go 8-9 deep.

Yep. The decisions get tough again when you're only 6 deep though.

Exactly; that was the Bears problem that year. We lost 3 players in the offseason who while they may not have started that year, would have been in the 8-9 man rotation and played 15-18 minutes a game in Pickens, Porter, and McFarland. We ended up with a bench of Scheer and Patterson and not much else; won the league but wore down as the year wore on.

[Aargh]

That's the year I was referring to, where WSU fans kept saying they had the two best teams in the conference, but still lost both times to MSU and took second in the conference. Shocker posters kept complaining that Marshall wasn't getting the right players on the court at crunch time, hinted several times about some division on the team between Stutz and others, and that they had not developed a go-to player like Weems. Those were points made on the Shocker board. Every Coach likes to have depth, but they will also tell you it's hard to keep 11-12 guys happy when they have pretty comparable abilities. I thought Marshall had trouble that year deciding what role he wanted for a number of players and they lost several close games when they had poor possessions late. There aren't as many tough decisions when you only go 8-9 deep.

I still believe there were serious chemistry issues on that team.

Insider info at WSU indicated that Durley was not going to get his scholarship renewed after his So season. Durley was a Turgeon recruit who sat out a season with an injury. After he recovered from the injury, he had no interest in doing the rehab or work to get back into playing shape. That gave him to Marshall as a Fr and he admitted to the press - "I don't like to work hard. I'm lazy".

Stutz was a hard-working guy who over-achieved based on his work ethic. Durley was a self-admitted lazy guy who could score 30 (and give up 30) if you got the ball in his hands.

Stutz went to suburban small-school religion-based private schools. The rest of team went to (mostly) inner-city public schools. Other than Stutz, the rest of the team was primarily inner-city athletic guys and some JuCo's. Stutz was vocal, well-spoken, and viewed himself as the team leader.

Do you see why I think there may have been some chemistry issues? After he signed Stutz, Marshall hasn't really gone for many (if any) white, suburban, parochial-school players.

[rlh04d]

That's the year I was referring to, where WSU fans kept saying they had the two best teams in the conference, but still lost both times to MSU and took second in the conference. Shocker posters kept complaining that Marshall wasn't getting the right players on the court at crunch time, hinted several times about some division on the team between Stutz and others, and that they had not developed a go-to player like Weems. Those were points made on the Shocker board. Every Coach likes to have depth, but they will also tell you it's hard to keep 11-12 guys happy when they have pretty comparable abilities. I thought Marshall had trouble that year deciding what role he wanted for a number of players and they lost several close games when they had poor possessions late. There aren't as many tough decisions when you only go 8-9 deep.

Alas, we only won a national tournament that year.

If only Marshall didn't have so many tough decisions to make.

As I recall, we lost four conference games that season by a combined 14 points. MoSt, meanwhile, as the best team in the conference, lost the Valley tournament, failed to make the NCAA tournament, and got blown out in a second round NIT loss.

[BEARZ77]

Alas but you never seem to want to deal with the point of the post; that being most Shocker fans felt you had the depth to have the best two teams in the Valley and that most of the year felt Marshall wasn't getting them on the court in the right combinations. That's the point being discussed. Spin it how you want, the results were less than what you felt you should have had given the talent you spent the year promoting. How could such a poor MSU team ever have beaten such a contingent twice when you were at full strength and we were short handed the whole year, especially in a game when all the marbles were on the table for a conference title. Either you didn't have the talent, which the NIT run clearly showed you did, or as was initially suggested, Marshall struggled in the regular season to get the right combinations on the floor.

[Redbird Recon]

Stutz went to suburban small-school religion-based private schools. The rest of team went to (mostly) inner-city public schools. Other than Stutz, the rest of the team was primarily inner-city athletic guys and some JuCo's. Stutz was vocal, well-spoken, and viewed himself as the team leader.

Do you see why I think there may have been some chemistry issues? After he signed Stutz, Marshall hasn't really gone for many (if any) white, suburban, parochial-school players.

A lot of foreplay before finally getting to the word white

[glm38]

It's really not an indictment or criticism of Marshall or WSU that the Shox may have had chemistry/playing time issues some years despite having a ton of talent. He and his staff are obviously going to try to get all the high quality talent that they can. And lately they've been doing a better job of that than anyone in the MVC. It's a problem that most teams and coaches would love to have. But it does sometimes backfire. And I think the year we are referencing (3 years ago) is a good example.

Yes the Shox season ended up pretty darned good that year (winning the NIT). But for that level of talent you could argue they could/should have won the conference and made an NCAA run. They were definitely much, much deeper and more athletic than the Bears team that year - yet lost to them head to head. Yes the Bears underacheived too due to a lack of depth mainly due to injuries and bad luck. It's really just unfortunate for both teams (and the Valley) because both teams were certainly capable of good NCAA runs that year.