-
Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.
Wessler's take on Les
- Thread starter IheartBU
- Start date
chitownBUB
New member
"Doug Elgin pondered the state of his league. In the midst of his soliloquy, Elgin said this:
"Jim Les does not get enough credit for what he did with Bradley. He had a hell of a year."
Yes, he did. And he deserves all the credit that comes his way"
Agreed.
"Jim Les does not get enough credit for what he did with Bradley. He had a hell of a year."
Yes, he did. And he deserves all the credit that comes his way"
Agreed.
Dallas Brave
New member
Well it's nice for KW to take a step back and provide a updated assessment of the program.
To KW's credit, he openly admited that he has been a bit slow on recognizing the progress of the program when he wrote, "I'll be honest. One year ago, even after the Braves had reached the Sweet 16 for the first time in 51 years, I was not convinced Les had the program on sound footing."
To KW's credit, he openly admited that he has been a bit slow on recognizing the progress of the program when he wrote, "I'll be honest. One year ago, even after the Braves had reached the Sweet 16 for the first time in 51 years, I was not convinced Les had the program on sound footing."
I have to respectively disagree with KW in regards to our team underachieving last season. It took two-thirds of last season for Les to learn the "new" system under Chuck Buescher. I think this season shows that Les now has the tools to know how to adjust to different styles of offense depending on the types of players he has to work with. He will be a great coach for years to come, and while this season definately reinforced his status, it did not take this season for me to realize how good Les can be. I already knew that based on last year's results.
Sorry KW. You're a day late and a dollar short as usual! :roll:
Sorry KW. You're a day late and a dollar short as usual! :roll:
BradleyBrave
New member
Bravesfan said:
'Under' Chuck Buescher? I don't think so. Chuck came in and was a tremendous asset to the program in his 2 years on the bench, but Jim wasn't 'under' anyone.
With the talent on last year's team, a 5th place MVC finish was underachieving. It wasn't until March when they finally realized their potential. At 13-9 last year, I don't think anyone would have said that BU was playing to their potential. If anyone did, they must have had very low expectations for that group.
abesimpson
New member
I kinda agree with KW on this one. Last year, Les had 4 guys who would end up playing pro. Kinda hard not to win with that kind of talent.
IMO, this year really solidified him as a good coach. Consistently winning roads games, no more one-and-dones in St. Louis, and finishing 4-5 places ahead of most preseason polls make him worth the extra money.
IMO, this year really solidified him as a good coach. Consistently winning roads games, no more one-and-dones in St. Louis, and finishing 4-5 places ahead of most preseason polls make him worth the extra money.
Lakeview Brave
New member
Bravesfan said:
What new system under Chuck? We did under achieve last year big time IMO. We had a 7 foot center who was the ninth pick in the draft and couldnt finish better then 5th! We lost at Inst and Drake! Luckily we turned it on late and started to play to our potential, however we were 1 Cellus miss from the corner away from losing to Creighton in St. Louis and no tournament. I completely agree with KW those two wins in the NCAA last year do not make a program or prove that much. This season proved allot to me about the program and the direction its heading in. Even without Chuck in the future I think we are in great hands now.
DannyCooksey
New member
Les isn't stupid
With the roster you guys will have for the next 2-3 years, there's no reason to scrap that system. It's tough to match up with and has a ton of versatility to it.
I have a ton of respect for what he did this year. He adapted his attack around his roster, not the other way around. That's the mark of any strong coach.
With the roster you guys will have for the next 2-3 years, there's no reason to scrap that system. It's tough to match up with and has a ton of versatility to it.
I have a ton of respect for what he did this year. He adapted his attack around his roster, not the other way around. That's the mark of any strong coach.
dogsrus said:
I think part of the reason we got pounded by Miss St was the 4-guard alignments...
Rebounding is a big part of the game. It got to a point where deep inside I was almost rooting for a guy to make his last free throw so they woulnd't have a chance to pull it down and score on us.
I enjoy the 4-guard offense(/defense) and I think now that Les has developed it very well it can be a big part of our program and used to change up the situation in a game and/or exploit mismatches, but I'm also hoping that our base alignment involves two post players for defense (we gave up a ton of the easy ones) and rebounding... PLUS a few easy baskets of our own.
BradleyBrave
New member
thefish7 said:
The 4 (and sometimes 5) guard offense rebounded just fine against Providence, didn't it?
Mississippi St runs practically the same offense as we do. They didn't pound us inside, they bombed 3's and got out in transition. Yes, the rebounding disparity didn't help, but the 4-guard offense isn't the culprit. It's the lack of any true inside depth, and our guards being poor fundamentally at boxing out. Rebounding is more about position and desire than heigth. We have a 6'5" guard who doesn't even average 3 rebounds a game. That's bad. Yes, it will help to have some bigger guards next year and some bigger bodies inside. However, if those players box out as poorly as this year's players did, we'll continue to get beaten on the glass.
BradleyBrave said:The 4 (and sometimes 5) guard offense rebounded just fine against Providence, didn't it?
Mississippi St runs practically the same offense as we do. They didn't pound us inside, they bombed 3's and got out in transition. Yes, the rebounding disparity didn't help, but the 4-guard offense isn't the culprit. It's the lack of any true inside depth, and our guards being poor fundamentally at boxing out. Rebounding is more about position and desire than heigth. We have a 6'5" guard who doesn't even average 3 rebounds a game. That's bad. Yes, it will help to have some bigger guards next year and some bigger bodies inside. However, if those players box out as poorly as this year's players did, we'll continue to get beaten on the glass.
JJ Tauai rebounded fine against Providence anyway
It's all a matter of degree on the boxing out issue... a 5'10" guard with heart and good box out skills just generally isn't going to have much of a chance against a 6'8+ player. You're right though, I think Zach could have pulled in a lot more rebounds this year if his positioning had been better. In a lot of situations I liked having Salley out there more because I think he generally did do a better job in that area.
Back to post defense and JJ in particular. JJ played a LOT of the "power forward" type position this year. He did a great job, and a lot better than I thought a 6'3" guard would be able to do. I'd, like, though, to see what the FG % against him was deep in the low post. He played strong and played great defense on the ball, but anytime he was defending a post player who managed to get near the basket he pretty much got scored on... It's not his fault, he just was not big enough down there to defend that kind of post play.
So... when I talk about 4-guard offense and criticize the defense, I'm talking as much, or even more, about the ability to defend in the low post as I am about rebounding.
BradleyBrave
New member
thefish7 said:BradleyBrave said:The 4 (and sometimes 5) guard offense rebounded just fine against Providence, didn't it?
Mississippi St runs practically the same offense as we do. They didn't pound us inside, they bombed 3's and got out in transition. Yes, the rebounding disparity didn't help, but the 4-guard offense isn't the culprit. It's the lack of any true inside depth, and our guards being poor fundamentally at boxing out. Rebounding is more about position and desire than heigth. We have a 6'5" guard who doesn't even average 3 rebounds a game. That's bad. Yes, it will help to have some bigger guards next year and some bigger bodies inside. However, if those players box out as poorly as this year's players did, we'll continue to get beaten on the glass.
JJ Tauai rebounded fine against Providence anyway
It's all a matter of degree on the boxing out issue... a 5'10" guard with heart and good box out skills just generally isn't going to have much of a chance against a 6'8+ player. You're right though, I think Zach could have pulled in a lot more rebounds this year if his positioning had been better. In a lot of situations I liked having Salley out there more because I think he generally did do a better job in that area.
Back to post defense and JJ in particular. JJ played a LOT of the "power forward" type position this year. He did a great job, and a lot better than I thought a 6'3" guard would be able to do. I'd, like, though, to see what the FG % against him was deep in the low post. He played strong and played great defense on the ball, but anytime he was defending a post player who managed to get near the basket he pretty much got scored on... It's not his fault, he just was not big enough down there to defend that kind of post play.
So... when I talk about 4-guard offense and criticize the defense, I'm talking as much, or even more, about the ability to defend in the low post as I am about rebounding.
Valid points, but consider that BU should have had Ray Brown playing in the 'power wing' spot. Ray Brown is 6'7" 215, i.e. the same size as Matt Salley. We'll have Ray next year, as well as DeAaron Williams (6'4", 40" vertical leap, think Lawrence Wright), a bulked-up Andrew Warren (6'5"), and perhaps even Will Egolf (6'9" versatile F) playing that 'power wing' spot. I don't foresee defending the post and rebounding being as much of an issue as perhaps it was this year from the 'power wing' spot.
Basically what I am trying to say is that I don't think this will be as much of an issue in the future as it was this year. This year, guys like Tauai and Adams were forced into those situations because of unexpected departures and suspensions. Now that we have a system in place, I believe BU will recruit accordingly, and it looks like they already have with the size of our wing players next year (6'4" Williams, 6'5" Crouch, 6'5" Warren, 6'7" Brown). The heighth will be there. Position and desire will determine whether or not those guys want to defend and rebound.
BradleyBrave
New member
Grassman said:
As far as I know he's always been at least 6'6". He's got a good inch on JC and is eye-to-eye with Matt Salley. His height is legit.
BTW - Fish, wasn't trying to be adversarial or anything. I think we kind of have the same opinion on the matter, but are just stating it differently.
BradleyBrave said:
I didn't actually mean he worked under him, I meant that Buescher tutored him on various coaching points that helped Les mature as coach. While some of the problems with last years team probably did have to do with underachievment of the team, Les was not as experienced as the assistants and they helped him out on certain things. I at the time though did have all the confidence that Les would be a great coach, and since that turning point last season, he has been exactly that, a great coach who just concluded his best coaching job this season. I look for greater achievements from this team in the years to come with Les at the helm.