Men's Basketball

[pocatato]

When a team gives up 15 extra points on treys and does close to that with every team it plays it suggests the team defensive philosophy sucks. Figure out how to play man up defense or just sit down. This team is an embarrassment. Marcus Bradley had a great offensive game. Nobody played defense. There are few division one players on this team.

 

[Spudhead]

Time to fix basketball.

 

[Skippy]

Disturbing to see fewer than 3000 fans combined for the two Montanas this weekend. I believe Idaho State basketball has some major issues to address, and so does the entire Big Sky Conference. The quality of play in the league is near an all-time low, and attendance is reflective. There is very little commitment to basketball throughout the conference. It's almost like an afterthought everywhere but Weber and Montana. There are also a lot of outside factors that are killing the league: no TV contract and the plethora of other sports on TV, and the totally untenable non-conference scheduling situation league members find themselves in. The league office really needs to assert some leadership and try to get the individual members to start taking some action to improve the facilities, scheduling, and level of play in the league. Big Sky basketball is in desperate need of an infusion of energy, and no program is in greater need than Idaho State's right now.

 

[bengalcub]

I don't have a problem with ISU playing zone at all. What I have a problem with is not being able to get out of it and be effective when they need it. Before the last two games, I believe that ISU's three point shooting defense was at or near the top of the league as well as points per game allowed.

If you can't shoot the three or defend the three in this league you can really be in trouble.

I think the trouble with this team is not the defense but the offense. ISU has gotten very little production out of its last TWO recruiting classes.

When you look at what is returning on this team next year, I don't see any scoring outside of Bradley. I know they have a JC commitment in Ali Faruqbey. We also don't know the status on another JC kid, Anthony Knight from Merritt College. He could be good if he shows up on campus or is already on campus. Evans had better get at least 2-3 more proven JC scorers.

Counting on RS Freshman and True Freshman to score and to be productive next season is a huge mistake in my opinion. If Evans does not find 2-3 more scorers, Idaho State will be worse than it is this year by a long, long ways and that is tough to say.

I hate to say this team is bad but it is. They simply cannot score points, hit the three or even hit FT's. I have watched every game that they have played this year with the exception of one game during the Utah State tournament that was not available online. The offense has been dismal in 85-90% of its game.

 

[boisebengal]

As bad as ISU is this year it's difficult for me to watch a lot of their games. But I really do like Coach Evans and I think he is basically a pretty good basketball coach. I'm sure Bill knows that our talent level really isn't where it needs to be, and he knows that having a new gym would help recruiting in a huge way. And he feels that since there are no major donors that have stepped forward to help out with getting a gym, then we could eventually see this into fruition through bonding.

But right now at ISU our needs are many. And I feel that we've really got to get some major improvements done to the dome before we can think about getting a new gym, and we could eventually get these improvements taken care of through bonding. We can always play basketball games in the dome, and at Reed, for as long as we have to until we can figure out how we can get the financing needed for a new gym. But as far as Holt is concerned, our most immediate needs there are to get some repairs done to the roof and to get a new HVAC system.

 

[Skippy]

The problem with bonding is you have to have a revenue source to pay off the bonds. I'm not aware of any obvious sources of revenue to pay for major capital projects at ISU right now.

 

[Skippy]

I don't have a problem with ISU playing zone at all. What I have a problem with is not being able to get out of it and be effective when they need it. Before the last two games, I believe that ISU's three point shooting defense was at or near the top of the league as well as points per game allowed.

If you can't shoot the three or defend the three in this league you can really be in trouble.

I think the trouble with this team is not the defense but the offense. ISU has gotten very little production out of its last TWO recruiting classes.

When you look at what is returning on this team next year, I don't see any scoring outside of Bradley. I know they have a JC commitment in Ali Faruqbey. We also don't know the status on another JC kid, Anthony Knight from Merritt College. He could be good if he shows up on campus or is already on campus. Evans had better get at least 2-3 more proven JC scorers.

Counting on RS Freshman and True Freshman to score and to be productive next season is a huge mistake in my opinion. If Evans does not find 2-3 more scorers, Idaho State will be worse than it is this year by a long, long ways and that is tough to say.

I hate to say this team is bad but it is. They simply cannot score points, hit the three or even hit FT's. I have watched every game that they have played this year with the exception of one game during the Utah State tournament that was not available online. The offense has been dismal in 85-90% of its game.

I had an interesting conversation this summer with one of the coaching candidates for the ISU job when Bill was hired. He told me he dropped out of the search after discussing ISU's more extensive academic requirements for junior college recruits. He said ISU is a "juco job" and the Big Sky is a "juco league," and ISU's tougher academic requirements for junior college recruits made it very difficult for the school to compete. The last two recruiting classes at ISU, I think, have born that out.

I've said it before and I firmly believe, Pocatello has to be one of the two or three toughest Division I locations to recruit to. If you add in higher academic requirements, it just makes it tougher. And not too long ago, say 10 years or so, ISU could at least make a living on under-recruited Idaho kids like Matt Stucki, David Schroeder and Logan Kinghorn. But with the rapid growth of AAU travel teams and summer camps, there are very few under-recruited kids anymore. ISU couldn 't even get in the door with the two best local kids this year, Steph Gonzalez and Malek Harwell, whose dad played at ISU.

Finally, there is the ongoing facilities issues at ISU. The basketball team doesn't even know where or when it's going to practice until football is over and the dome clears out, and then they often get kicked out of their own building for the U of I Ag Show or the Simplot games in mid-season. Unless somebody wins the lottery, I don't anticipate a new basketball arena built in my lifetime, but a HUGE step up would be a practice facility the mens and women's basketball and volleyball teams could share.

 

[bengalmama]

So what's the answer? I don't know if you can blame the recruiting class from this year. One quit, two are red-shirting, and only one is playing minimal minutes. I've looked across the BSC and very few freshman contribute much or play at all. I believe that we should have 3 scholarships available for next season. Am I correct? If we were able to get two scorer's and a post I would think the red-shirt freshman and true freshman wouldn't be expected to be counted on as the main scoring threats. I agree with the previous post that depending on the young players as your main scorer's is a mistake. I would guess that the red-shirt freshman would more than likely play 10-15 mins a games next season, or more if they are doing well. Hopefully, if we get some good JUCO players they can contribute immediately. Ali seems to fit the need, we just need to see how he pans out. Gary will be a freshman. Seems like he is a good shooter but high school or prep school is a completely different beast than college.
The team is not great this year. I agree with that. Bottom line, we can't shoot. I imagine that off season there will be lots of shooting practice. I'll try to bring up some positive though. I like the fact that Wilson has been more willing to shoot the last few games. Before, the defenders wouldn't even come out on him because he never shot. We need to continue getting offensive production from him. Bradley has improved offensively. He does at times take questionable shots but I believe can is an asset to the team and will get more time next season. Evans has stepped up. We aren't the only BSC school that is suffering this season. Montana State, SUU, Weber, and NAU just to name a few have had less than stellar performance so far this season.
I agree with Skippy. Somehow we need to get our conference televised. Somehow we need to get a crowd. Somehow we need to get better practice facilities. It's hard to lure kids when ISU is not a basketball oriented university. We've had football success this season which generally helps get more recruits interested in the school. We just need to get some bball success which takes time to build. I do believe that Coach Evans knows what he is doing. I believe the program will turn around in a few years. As a whole, the BSC needs some revamping. Recruiting is a gamble. Some players pan out and others don't. Who would've thought that a scholarship player would quit after 3 games? I say don't throw in the towel just yet. Look at our deficiencies this year and look to improve on them. What else can we do? I still hold hope for the team for this year and years to come.

 

[PBP]

I think Brad's analysis is spot on the money, and frankly without the individual schools financially being able to ramp up programs, facilities, being able to pay more to get teams to come to their location, I don't know what can be done. And I don't know how many of the Big Sky schools are in a position right now to do this. (My guess is not very many...) From what Brad has written in the past the conference office understands the problems and has appealed to the schools to work on improving things. Has that fallen on deaf ears? Could the conference office be in a position to help individual schools improve their home schedules by helping to pay to bring in better / different teams then the usual assortment? Don't know if they could or would (Brad...any thoughts on this point?)

But I do have a question that I wanted to put out for discussion.

Over the last five years say, the Big Sky women's basketball situation is pretty good. They were ranked pretty well if I remember correctly, in overall strength nationally the past five years. North Dakota, Southern Utah and now Idaho brought talent into the mix. Seasons have been competitive, Big Sky teams have actually won games in the WNIT.

Overall what are the women's programs doing that the men aren't?

I mean the financial situation is the same at most if not all the schools regarding women's basketball (it's not like schools are dumping more money into women's programs), the facilities aren't any different as many schools play men's and women's basketball on the same court...so how are the women succeeding (in many categories) with the same financial and arena situations as the men...but the men aren't in the Big Sky? (Granted of course that men's attendance is much higher overall save for maybe four schools from a women's standpoint)

 

[sasquatch]

Disturbing to see fewer than 3000 fans combined for the two Montanas this weekend. I believe Idaho State basketball has some major issues to address, and so does the entire Big Sky Conference. The quality of play in the league is near an all-time low, and attendance is reflective. There is very little commitment to basketball throughout the conference. It's almost like an afterthought everywhere but Weber and Montana. There are also a lot of outside factors that are killing the league: no TV contract and the plethora of other sports on TV, and the totally untenable non-conference scheduling situation league members find themselves in. The league office really needs to assert some leadership and try to get the individual members to start taking some action to improve the facilities, scheduling, and level of play in the league. Big Sky basketball is in desperate need of an infusion of energy, and no program is in greater need than Idaho State's right now.

To be fair, classes didn't begin until today, so a lot of students weren't in town during these games. Probably wouldn't have made a huge difference, but it would have boosted attendance some.

I know some didn't like the Altitude contract, mainly because it really wasn't a financial deal. But it did provide some exposure at the regional level. Right now you could say the Big Sky's deal is online, so it's important to produce the best production possible. ISU needs to rebrand the basketball program, top to bottom.

It sounds all fine and good to say the league office should persuade the members to improve such things as facilities, but it's the same argument as trying to get grape juice out of a lemon. Sacramento State knows they need a new facility, but the students voted down the fee increase associated with it just last month. Almost 80% voted it down.

http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article4276742.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The same can be said about scheduling. Schools know they have to schedule better, but when no Division I schools want to travel to your arena, then what?

 

[Skippy]

Disturbing to see fewer than 3000 fans combined for the two Montanas this weekend. I believe Idaho State basketball has some major issues to address, and so does the entire Big Sky Conference. The quality of play in the league is near an all-time low, and attendance is reflective. There is very little commitment to basketball throughout the conference. It's almost like an afterthought everywhere but Weber and Montana. There are also a lot of outside factors that are killing the league: no TV contract and the plethora of other sports on TV, and the totally untenable non-conference scheduling situation league members find themselves in. The league office really needs to assert some leadership and try to get the individual members to start taking some action to improve the facilities, scheduling, and level of play in the league. Big Sky basketball is in desperate need of an infusion of energy, and no program is in greater need than Idaho State's right now.

To be fair, classes didn't begin until today, so a lot of students weren't in town during these games. Probably wouldn't have made a huge difference, but it would have boosted attendance some.

I know some didn't like the Altitude contract, mainly because it really wasn't a financial deal. But it did provide some exposure at the regional level. Right now you could say the Big Sky's deal is online, so it's important to produce the best production possible. ISU needs to rebrand the basketball program, top to bottom.

It sounds all fine and good to say the league office should persuade the members to improve such things as facilities, but it's the same argument as trying to get grape juice out of a lemon. Sacramento State knows they need a new facility, but the students voted down the fee increase associated with it just last month. Almost 80% voted it down.

http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article4276742.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The same can be said about scheduling. Schools know they have to schedule better, but when no Division I schools want to travel to your arena, then what?

I believe only the Big Sky Commissioner's office can get the presidents' full attention on the need to upgrade the league's commitment to basketball. There are several things the league could do as a whole to improve scheduling, for instance. They could play a pre-conference tournament with the Big West, for example, or enter into scheduling alliances with other mid-major conferences.

The commissioner could put pressure on the league's presidents to get serious about basketball facilities. The Sac State students voted down the fee increase, but that does not prevent the Sac president from imposing the fee increase unilaterally. Is that a wise thing to do? Perhaps not, but if the league office were consistent in raising the importance of improving facilities league-wide, maybe basketball facilities would move up the priority list at some institutions.

Those are just a couple of ideas. If the collective will of the league office and presidents was focused on improving the conference as a basketball league, a lot of other good, do-able ideas could certainly be pursued -- if not at every school in the league, then where they make the most sense. Right now, the Big Sky is rated near the bottom of the nation's D-1 basketball leagues. If our league champion is anybody other than EWU, they will certainly get a 16 seed in the NCAA tournament. At some point soon, the Big Sky champion may be relegated to the play-in game. Attendance has been on a 20-year downward spiral. Nobody has built a new basketball arena since the 1970s. Men's basketball is the poor stepchild in the conference athletic departments, and no one seems to care much. But nothing is going to get better until somebody asserts some leadership on the topic.

 

[pocatato]

I am pleased by the responses this thread has received. I respect everyone's opinion and am not trying to disrespect coach Evans like a certain Bengals player's relative did earlier. I have never thought a zone defense as a base defense was a sound idea in the era of the three point shot. Since the line was extended to the NBA distance it has made it even harder to get out on shooters. I know the stats say we defend well because of the low scores we are typically forcing in games. Some of that is because a zone slows down the game. But if an offense passes the ball well a shooter is eventually open and it seems as though many teams with good shooters score more threes against us than they would score against teams that play ball pressure man to man defense. There is nothing wrong with a zone defense if it is part of a larger package. But I believe it is better to give up two points than eight to fifteen extra points per game because a good shooting team can break down our zone at the end of a shot clock. Even as poorly as ISU played on Saturday night they would have been in the game but for eleven or twelve extra point the Griz had by halftime. Just sayin.

 

[bengalcub]

Bengalmama--I am certainly not blaming the class itself. What I am saying is that ISU needed to bring in more JC kids especially in light of the production that they lost from Sanchez and Hatchett.

Go to the stats page on the ISU website and look at the PPG, RPG and APG from the last two classes and it is a very glaring weakness.

 

[letuknow]

For us to be more competitive in all sports I believe ISU needs to lower the gpa requirements. Womens sports in my opinion is a different animal. Generally speaking women are better students. Therefore in my opinion it's easier for those teams to recruit. Just my :twocents:

 

[PBP]

Let:

I agree with you in general terms but I also know of some instances where recruits wanted to come to ISU from the women's side and could immediately contribute athletically only the entrance requirements stopped that possibility.

If I remember correctly, ISU's academic requirements are not only higher than any other Big Sky school but they are higher than the standards set by the NCAA itself. The fallout from what happened with football under the previous coaching staff impacted every sport at the school since you couldn't make academic requirements higher for just a single specific sport.

PBP

 

[sasquatch]

Skippy, I agree about the scheduling component. The Big Sky should be working with the WAC, Big West, Summit, or any other conference for a scheduling agreement.

As far as facilities, I still think it's wishful thinking that the conference can force a member's hand to improve them. Look at the chaos just recently about ISU's plans to sell the president's house and buy a new one. Can you imagine if ISU raised student fees for a new arena? Not sure what the answer is, but I think we're stuck between a rock and a hard place.

 

[bengalcub]

I see a ton of valid points here. I respect everyone's views. Interesting topic...

It may be hard at ISU and I get that the BSC may be struggling in attendance and interest. However, Idaho State can still be a solid team in the Big Sky in basketball with what they have. They might not have the best and it may be a challenge but they can still find kids to win in this league.

 

[Bengal Roar]

You are right Cub. See (ISU Football) folks. It happened last year and it could or should happen in basketball. Recruiting issues? Furthermore, isn't this his 4th year? Can some computer guru do the #'s? Have we improved in the last four years or are we getting worse? I can care less about all the other teams in the bsc. We are ISU. We raised the bar in football now we need to do it in Basketball. But what's happening in the current state I don't know if it can happen?

 

[JJB]

This is Evan's third year, and he was signed to a 3 year extension this past year.

Still not sure why Joe O'Brien gets a pass - maybe because the program didn't drop quite as far into the depths of Hell as Zamberlin's football squad did - but the APR mess hit the men's program too. The only reason ISU wasn't penalized with loss of scholarships and playoff bans is because Evans had single year APR scores above the 930 threshold. The single year APR score his first year was 965, and last year it was a perfect 1,000. We're talking some recent multi-year APR scores of below and just barely above 900.

I haven't made sense of some of his redshirting philosophy and recruiting ability, but I'm willing to give a little more time based on the APR mess he was dealt.

 

[Bengal Roar]

Maybe I'm right or wrong? Don't really care right now. I have not attended any Basketball game this year so far. Why should I? Are they putting a product on the court that I'm proud of or that I want to pay for? Nope. Like Krames said about FB, until you put something on the field worth watching why pay $1-$100?

This team will have some more growing pains but they can turn it around like football if they want to.

They know how to stay in the game. They know how to compete. They Do Not know how to win yet.