iyo, what's the missing piece of the puzzle............

[krak-r-jacks]

to me, it's that aj hasn't been able to find that 6'3-4" talented post player---or been lucky to find that diamond in the rough. i would think with the success that the jacks have had and are having, he could pull someone into brookings. i'd love to see what this years class (not to mention future classes) could do with a post player that would be a consistent 1st team summit league player.

and, i understand---very competitive on the recruiting trail.

[rabidrabbit]

Re: iyo, what's the missing piece of the puzzle............

What constitutes success? The Jacks have had a SUPER SUCCESSFUL RUN (12 seasons +). Relative to OUR CONFERENCE, Jacks ARE the best. Have 6 straight seasons to prove that. 5 NCAA appearances (every year eligible), and were the earliest selectee for the WNIT before that.

Does success mean a top Coaches or AP 25 every year? No non-FBS school has done that year after year. Those non-FBS programs that have cracked the top 25 have had a star player, usually a versatile big. This includes the Jacks magical run, only to get hosed by Baylor. Delaware and Gonzaga are the other examples. Gonzaga lost maybe 5 games during their two year road of success. Who bested the Zags for 2 of those losses? SDSU Jacks.

Jacks have the teams to make a good run in the NCAA's. Just need to string together 4 halves like the first half vs Penn St. in the NCAA's, then should be a sweet 16 team. Unfortunately, when been to the NCAA's the last 4 years, the team that lays an egg (ala Stanford, and more so Fl Gulf Coast) is the one that plays.

The parts are there, it's how they come together that will advance them or send them home.

[2002jack]

Re: iyo, what's the missing piece of the puzzle............

I would like to thank Rabid for responding intelligently to Krak-r-jacks concerns.

I thought for sure somebody would respond with a snarky, "I think AJ knows what he is doing" or "if you can do better, why don't you go coach yourself".

But instead we got an actual counterpoint to the original post. Thanks again Rabid!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[2002jack]

Re: iyo, what's the missing piece of the puzzle............

As for the debate , I am satisfied with the success of the women's team. I am not sure much can be done differently.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JimmyJack]

Re: iyo, what's the missing piece of the puzzle............

Right now, what's missing is consistency. That's not surprising considering how many young players are getting minutes.

[bigticket1]

Re: iyo, what's the missing piece of the puzzle............

Right now, what's missing is consistency. That's not surprising considering how many young players are getting minutes.

Agreed , especially when it comes to finishing shots close to the basket. The shots are there , just need to more consistently put them in the basket. Three's are great when they are falling , but if they aren't , you need a dependable inside game.

[Southeast]

Re: iyo, what's the missing piece of the puzzle............

We've been damn fortunate to have the quality and consistency enjoyed over the last 10 years. That being said, it seems like we are always bemoaning our relative lack of athleticism in mid-March. It's not easy to draw those types of players to rural SD. To me, advancing to the second round of the tourney will take 40 minutes of red-hot shooting coupled with an above-average defensive effort. We need some luck.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[jackdaniel]

Re: iyo, what's the missing piece of the puzzle............

to me, it's that aj hasn't been able to find that 6'3-4" talented post player---or been lucky to find that diamond in the rough. i would think with the success that the jacks have had and are having, he could pull someone into brookings. i'd love to see what this years class (not to mention future classes) could do with a post player that would be a consistent 1st team summit league player.

and, i understand---very competitive on the recruiting trail.

I think this years team is dang good,but wait til next year,we'll be even better,possibly the best ever to date.I'm hoping the tipping point comes next year.

[Nidaros]

Re: iyo, what's the missing piece of the puzzle............

I agree with the starter of this thread. We don't match up with teams with a huge and athletic center. BYU is a great example, but since we done fine with teams who don't have that great post, then we are doing our thing. I think we do have much to be proud of and AJ has done it all on his own pretty much that is the coaching. Losing to MTSU was not a sin, IMO. That's a quality program who we beat last year at our house. So I think we need to relax a little, who knows some big lady might come our way.

[krak-r-jacks]

Re: iyo, what's the missing piece of the puzzle............

i hope some of you aren't taking my op wrong. i am not arguing the success of the program---that speaks for itself. there is no doubt aj has turned the woman's program into one of the better mid-major programs in this part of the country. now, programs across the country know of the jackrabbit brand. and, i think sdsu's success has trickled down to the other programs in the state. you are seeing very good women's bb at the augies, usf's, northern, etc. sdsu women's bb is fantastic for girls bb in this state and surrounding areas. i also believe amy williams will have success at usd (*gulp* kinda hard to spit out ).

i was just trying to open a little discussion---not being critical of the program. imo, i just would like to see that "strong" post. so much feeds off that.

[OldHare]

Re: iyo, what's the missing piece of the puzzle............

I think that we may have more trouble playing against strong post players. The Jackrabbits did fairly well against Penn St who had several players 6'4" and bigger. South Carolina had a couple of taller and strong women in their lineup and they rejected a fair number of shots and they scored well. Xavier had a similar lineup when we played that team. I am not sure that a "strong" post is mandatory. It would be nice. We need to schedule more teams OOC to give us some experience playing against the strong post that we will not see in the Summit. (BYU, PSU, Irish, Stanford, etc) Overall, the Jackrabbits should match well for most games if we are looking at size. When we play the Irish, it will be interesting to see if the size is more important or the rest of the talent(speed, ball movement, shooting %, or defense) is more important.

[MontanaRabbit]

Re: iyo, what's the missing piece of the puzzle............

Xavier had a similar lineup when we played that team.

You talking about the Xavier team we played in the tourney a couple years ago? If I recall correctly they were very big down low. Like maybe two 6'-5" or 6'-6" girls.

[OldHare]

Re: iyo, what's the missing piece of the puzzle............

You talking about the Xavier team we played in the tourney a couple years ago? If I recall correctly they were very big down low. Like maybe two 6'-5" or 6'-6" girls.

That was the team. The Jackrabbits will need to figure how to play against a "Griner" in the big games. BYU had their big gal beat us. The quick game against Penn St worked. The second half the Nittany Lions played a little smaller to get more quickness in the line up. The Jackrabbits kept their confidence in the second half and held onto the game. We will need more of those games this season.

[filbert]

Re: iyo, what's the missing piece of the puzzle............

That was the team. The Jackrabbits will need to figure how to play against a "Griner" in the big games. BYU had their big gal beat us. The quick game against Penn St worked. The second half the Nittany Lions played a little smaller to get more quickness in the line up. The Jackrabbits kept their confidence in the second half and held onto the game. We will need more of those games this season.

Nobody really figured out how to play against Greiner. That lady was unreal. Pity she played for Baylor. (But hatin' on Baylor isn't nearly as much fun, nor as utterly inexplicable as hatin' on IPFW, so there you go . . .)

And that Xavier team was just plain scary good that year. I don't remember who beat them, but they were the real deal that year. Seems like I recall they were something like #6 in the country when we played them but I might be misremembering that.

I'm still waiting for some Dakota/Minnesota/Wisconsin 6'5"+ girl's HS basketball stud player with mad court skilz (i.e. top 50 prospect) to decide she's really just the most comfortable with Brookings and with AJ, and voila! We'll have our big-time big girl. It'll happen. Just a matter of when. Can't rush it.

[JamesJacks]

Re: iyo, what's the missing piece of the puzzle............

No doubt having more size is always nice. But the thing that is evident when we play some of the high major teams is the difference in overall athleticism at all positions. I know that athleticism doesn't win games alone. Knowing how to play the game the right way is a major factor too. We have very good athletes, but there is a higher level of athleticism that a lot of those teams have throughout their rosters. Our team knows how to play the game, and play it well. This is what gives us a great chance to win every single game. But sometimes more athletic players can just make a play because they can. And if you have a handful of better overall athletes on a roster, the margin for error is smaller for a less athletic team. We've beaten some ranked teams (Penn State this year and Nebraska last year) so the Jacks have proven they can do it. But doing this on a consistent basis it will be tougher as you face better athleticism.