SCAC next year
- Thread starter Money$$
- Start date
Wow, quite the bold prediction there, wouldn't you say Money$$? You're not only predicting that they'll win the SCAC, but that they'll win the whole thing.
Now, if Zillah continues to grow and develop the way they did in their second half run, they might have something to say about your pre-season prediciton.
Wasn't it you that picked Zillah to finish 5th in there league this last season? Maybe you had a bad day at the track, or maybe you just like the front-runnners? Whatever the case, don't be handing the Gold ball over to LaSalle just yet. If I recall, you also picked Granger to win the whole thing this year....
The SCAC really seems to be one of the tougher leagues in the state. Connell will be tough next year, as will Mabton, Zillah, and maybe even a few other teams. LaSalle won't be able to just show up and win anymore. Teams will be preparing day in and day out in order to battle in the SCAC.
We'll have to re-visit your prediction this time next year.
"Failing ot prepare is preparing to fail"
John Wooden
Now, if Zillah continues to grow and develop the way they did in their second half run, they might have something to say about your pre-season prediciton.
Wasn't it you that picked Zillah to finish 5th in there league this last season? Maybe you had a bad day at the track, or maybe you just like the front-runnners? Whatever the case, don't be handing the Gold ball over to LaSalle just yet. If I recall, you also picked Granger to win the whole thing this year....
The SCAC really seems to be one of the tougher leagues in the state. Connell will be tough next year, as will Mabton, Zillah, and maybe even a few other teams. LaSalle won't be able to just show up and win anymore. Teams will be preparing day in and day out in order to battle in the SCAC.
We'll have to re-visit your prediction this time next year.
"Failing ot prepare is preparing to fail"
John Wooden
I would have to agree. La Salle will find the SCAC a little tougher than the league they are in now. Connell and Zillah will be pretty good. Granger won't fall as far as people think. Mabton will be better as well.
C'mon guys, I'm just laying out the welcome mat for all the LaSalle posters who frequent the Bsports board. They have a great tradition and a great coach and great kids with a great work ethic and a great......... Well I don't want to steal Burr's thunder. He'll be here soon enough.
As far as predictions. Incorrect predictions are a part of sports right? The Zillah girls exceeded my expectations this last year. And yep they should be much better next year. I would expect they will set their sights on a trophy next year.
As far as predictions. Incorrect predictions are a part of sports right? The Zillah girls exceeded my expectations this last year. And yep they should be much better next year. I would expect they will set their sights on a trophy next year.
For what it’s worth…
LaSalle is a very good team and a tremendous program. They will do well in 1A I have no doubt about that in both the short term and longer term.
Some will find it harder than others to compete with the Lightening. You will need to be able to not only handle pressure but also be able to make them pay for pressuring you. They are as consistent, disciplined and well organized as any program and are very well coached by a coach who knows how to make adjustments come tournament time. They return a whole lot including what will be at least a top five player in 1A in Bonny and I'd not be hugely shocked if she ends up the 1A MVP. She has an all around game and is very smooth, and she is surrounded by a good deal of talent that has bought into being role players when they need to be. Their starting five and a good deal of their bench are scorers, they’re a lot of other things too but everyone on that team can put the ball in the basket. They won't be tall for 1A but they will be long and fast. They also have a deep bench that can hammer you. The top teams can match their skill level, but only the very top teams will match their team skill level, and only extraordinary teams will surpass it in any given year.
If you cannot handle pressure you will get pressed and run out of the gym. If you do not execute very very well and cleanly you will find yourself on the wrong side of some long scores. Now I'm stressing the handling of pressure and execution because if you don't do those very very well LaSalle will beat you and I don't care how talented you think you are. DO NOT LET THESE GUYS GET PLAYING DOWN HILL ON YOU or might as well just stick a fork in ya because your done.
However, if you can hang with the Lynden Christians, the Kings, the Freemans, the Chelans then you will be able to play with the Lightening, if not then not.
Now I've not really followed 1A all that close so it is what it is but I'd predict LaSalle to trophy at state. How high will depend on what else is in 1A. They wouldn't have beaten Freeman but likely would have handled Granger, and most likely LC do to depth more than starting talent I'd guess but an LC Lightening match up this season would have looked to me like a touch and go either way game. This year in 1A I think they’d have taken home between second and fourth depending on the draw.
This post was edited on 3/9 4:58 PM by col-pul
LaSalle is a very good team and a tremendous program. They will do well in 1A I have no doubt about that in both the short term and longer term.
Some will find it harder than others to compete with the Lightening. You will need to be able to not only handle pressure but also be able to make them pay for pressuring you. They are as consistent, disciplined and well organized as any program and are very well coached by a coach who knows how to make adjustments come tournament time. They return a whole lot including what will be at least a top five player in 1A in Bonny and I'd not be hugely shocked if she ends up the 1A MVP. She has an all around game and is very smooth, and she is surrounded by a good deal of talent that has bought into being role players when they need to be. Their starting five and a good deal of their bench are scorers, they’re a lot of other things too but everyone on that team can put the ball in the basket. They won't be tall for 1A but they will be long and fast. They also have a deep bench that can hammer you. The top teams can match their skill level, but only the very top teams will match their team skill level, and only extraordinary teams will surpass it in any given year.
If you cannot handle pressure you will get pressed and run out of the gym. If you do not execute very very well and cleanly you will find yourself on the wrong side of some long scores. Now I'm stressing the handling of pressure and execution because if you don't do those very very well LaSalle will beat you and I don't care how talented you think you are. DO NOT LET THESE GUYS GET PLAYING DOWN HILL ON YOU or might as well just stick a fork in ya because your done.
However, if you can hang with the Lynden Christians, the Kings, the Freemans, the Chelans then you will be able to play with the Lightening, if not then not.
Now I've not really followed 1A all that close so it is what it is but I'd predict LaSalle to trophy at state. How high will depend on what else is in 1A. They wouldn't have beaten Freeman but likely would have handled Granger, and most likely LC do to depth more than starting talent I'd guess but an LC Lightening match up this season would have looked to me like a touch and go either way game. This year in 1A I think they’d have taken home between second and fourth depending on the draw.
This post was edited on 3/9 4:58 PM by col-pul
Col-pul, you seem to be putting the rings around their fingers already, just as Money$$ did.
No doubt are they a good program that has some good kids and really good coach, but don't act as if they have no chinks in their armor.
I remember watching them play against Burbank in the SunDome shootout this last year, and if I recall, the game was a two point win in favor of Burbank.
They will indeed make the SCAC west a better, tougher division, but don't assume that other will simply lay down for them because they have a "Lightning Bolt" across their jersey.
They, just like every other team, have defects that they will need to work on throughout the summer and season in order to be on top.
Most of the teams that they have played against in their league have coaches that probably couldn't coach themselves out of a wet paper bag. The teams they will face next year will have coaches that prepare their kids the same, and that know how to make adjustments as well.
LaSalle will make the league fun and exciting, but don't put the crown on their heads so soon. The SCAC is one of the most competitive leagues in teh state and I'm sure it will be fun to watch.
"You can't sail your ship on yesterdays wind"
No doubt are they a good program that has some good kids and really good coach, but don't act as if they have no chinks in their armor.
I remember watching them play against Burbank in the SunDome shootout this last year, and if I recall, the game was a two point win in favor of Burbank.
They will indeed make the SCAC west a better, tougher division, but don't assume that other will simply lay down for them because they have a "Lightning Bolt" across their jersey.
They, just like every other team, have defects that they will need to work on throughout the summer and season in order to be on top.
Most of the teams that they have played against in their league have coaches that probably couldn't coach themselves out of a wet paper bag. The teams they will face next year will have coaches that prepare their kids the same, and that know how to make adjustments as well.
LaSalle will make the league fun and exciting, but don't put the crown on their heads so soon. The SCAC is one of the most competitive leagues in teh state and I'm sure it will be fun to watch.
"You can't sail your ship on yesterdays wind"
Yes with Warden dropping down to B and with LaSalle moving up, Mabton moved to the east and LaSalle will be in the west keeping the 7-7 split.
LaSalle will definetly add to the competitiveness of league as a whole. Not sure I would crown them yet, but Bonney is a great player and the coach has her program headed in the correct direction.
LaSalle will definetly add to the competitiveness of league as a whole. Not sure I would crown them yet, but Bonney is a great player and the coach has her program headed in the correct direction.
Your right Col-Pul
LaSalle is going to be a very good addition to the 1A ranks, and I know you watched your Colfax girls play in the championship game, but did the LaSalle girl’s squad remind you of something from the past from the defensive standpoint?
East Valley perhaps, the down the line man to man defense with after scoring full court in your grill pressure?
Yes it is, Ray Zuetenhourse which was the assistant to Jack Cleveland during the back to back championship years, Ray studied and was a student of this defense from his mentor Jack.
The additional 2 or 3 rings he got with LaSalle in addition to the 2 from East Valley the defensive pressure strategy adapted to this group has to have turned some heads, Defense is what his job at LaSalle is, and the proof is in the results.
Along with Alyssa there head coach that actually competed at the collegiate level they have a huge advantage from coaching standpoints over anyone. As it has been professed before, when you have a high school girls basketball team that can play at a high level man to man defense you have a huge advantage over your competition.
It kills me but In terms of next year I personally know of 2 outstanding 8th grade players that play in the EV area that are going to be attending LaSalle next year because of two reasons. LaSalle is a great school and has a very good athletics program in which they want to be part of.
This post was edited on 3/10 8:33 AM by Impartial43
LaSalle is going to be a very good addition to the 1A ranks, and I know you watched your Colfax girls play in the championship game, but did the LaSalle girl’s squad remind you of something from the past from the defensive standpoint?
East Valley perhaps, the down the line man to man defense with after scoring full court in your grill pressure?
Yes it is, Ray Zuetenhourse which was the assistant to Jack Cleveland during the back to back championship years, Ray studied and was a student of this defense from his mentor Jack.
The additional 2 or 3 rings he got with LaSalle in addition to the 2 from East Valley the defensive pressure strategy adapted to this group has to have turned some heads, Defense is what his job at LaSalle is, and the proof is in the results.
Along with Alyssa there head coach that actually competed at the collegiate level they have a huge advantage from coaching standpoints over anyone. As it has been professed before, when you have a high school girls basketball team that can play at a high level man to man defense you have a huge advantage over your competition.
It kills me but In terms of next year I personally know of 2 outstanding 8th grade players that play in the EV area that are going to be attending LaSalle next year because of two reasons. LaSalle is a great school and has a very good athletics program in which they want to be part of.
This post was edited on 3/10 8:33 AM by Impartial43
No I've put nothing on their fingers. They do a good enough job of that themselves. All I did was let you know where that specific program rates. It will be a battle in 1A next season and LaSalle will be in the mix.
And you know what, Colfax lost both games at the shoot out and how did that work out for them? Or the year before or the year before or the year before when they went 1-1? If you think you can tell what you claim you can from December and January basketball your picks might have been as close as mine. (don't know what your picks were but mine are posted below)
And you know what, Colfax lost both games at the shoot out and how did that work out for them? Or the year before or the year before or the year before when they went 1-1? If you think you can tell what you claim you can from December and January basketball your picks might have been as close as mine. (don't know what your picks were but mine are posted below)
There's no way I would say LaSalle would have handled Granger this year. They may have been able to compete but to say LaSalle would handle Granger with the degree of certainty you implied? No way. Granger was senior heavy and very experienced. With probably the best PG and ballhandler in the state I don't think LaSalle's pressure D would have been insurmountable. Granger shot very poorly in the championship game but I believe if they played again Granger could definitely compete with Freeman.
Money, you may be right but notice I said LaSalle would handle them not dominate them. When push comes to shove the difference between programs like LaSalle and Granger is an understanding of how to win games. If Granger and LaSalle were in a close game LaSalle would manufacture a win. That's because of long experience, not just this team but also program experience, and nothing against the Granger coach but he'd have been out coached. Not saying Granger is poorly coached, quite the opposite they are very well coached, but LaSalle has one of the top ten or so staffs in the state regardless of classification. Just my VHO.
What I think would happen is Granger would keep it close, perhaps even hold a lead. Then about the middle of the fourth LaSalle would be able to make a push either because of exploiting some weakness they've seen during the game or just because they can manufacture points, and then Granger would start to press, become a little more hurried trying to make something happen. LaSalle would press that and that little bit out of place or off balance would become Lightening foul shots, a turnover, a little out of position... Just like how Colfax beat Toutle Lake this tournament or how Colfax beat Kings and LC in 1A a couple years ago.
IMHO, LaSalle would win 7 or 8 out of 10 in games against Granger for all the marbles. Regular season maybe different. You may be right and I may be wrong, you’ve seen Granger and I’ve only listened to a couple of their games, but never underestimate how important knowing how to win games and the deep confidence that you will prevail, even when nothing is going your way, are in final outcomes.
What I think would happen is Granger would keep it close, perhaps even hold a lead. Then about the middle of the fourth LaSalle would be able to make a push either because of exploiting some weakness they've seen during the game or just because they can manufacture points, and then Granger would start to press, become a little more hurried trying to make something happen. LaSalle would press that and that little bit out of place or off balance would become Lightening foul shots, a turnover, a little out of position... Just like how Colfax beat Toutle Lake this tournament or how Colfax beat Kings and LC in 1A a couple years ago.
IMHO, LaSalle would win 7 or 8 out of 10 in games against Granger for all the marbles. Regular season maybe different. You may be right and I may be wrong, you’ve seen Granger and I’ve only listened to a couple of their games, but never underestimate how important knowing how to win games and the deep confidence that you will prevail, even when nothing is going your way, are in final outcomes.
I think the LaSalle coaching staff will definitely like it in the SCAC next year. They will have a lot more fun coaching, instead of just trying to figure out how long to leave her starters in during blow outs.
I'm sure they'll still win, but she won't have to worry about 50 point lopsided victories day in and day out.
Top ten in the state? Not sure about that. Good Coaches? Definitely! It's tough to find out how good you really are when the level you coach and play against are totally at different ends of the spectrum for a majority of those games or the season.
Remember, this is just my personal opinion, just as it is all of yours.
Now, them winning 7 or 8 out of 10 games against a Granger team will never be known, but individuals can only speculate, and going back to Money$$ and his thought of Klarich being the best point guard in the state - well, I don't want to burst his bubble, but I think he's a little off the mark there!
"Excuses are the nails used to build a house of failure"
I'm sure they'll still win, but she won't have to worry about 50 point lopsided victories day in and day out.
Top ten in the state? Not sure about that. Good Coaches? Definitely! It's tough to find out how good you really are when the level you coach and play against are totally at different ends of the spectrum for a majority of those games or the season.
Remember, this is just my personal opinion, just as it is all of yours.
Now, them winning 7 or 8 out of 10 games against a Granger team will never be known, but individuals can only speculate, and going back to Money$$ and his thought of Klarich being the best point guard in the state - well, I don't want to burst his bubble, but I think he's a little off the mark there!
"Excuses are the nails used to build a house of failure"
I didn't say head coach, I said coaching staff. From the 9th grade, JV, assistants up through the head coach. Tell ya what, they'd not only know how they were going to beat someone, what adjustments to make to what and all the x's and o's go but they also know how you could beat them and make sure none of those things happen and do it with a very good plan of attack. You may find teams as well prepared as LaSalle but you won't find anyone in a big game that is better prepared.
I put them on the same tare with Colfax's.
I put them on the same tare with Colfax's.
I think every coaching staff that takes their basketball seriously would do the same. They would make sure they had every X and O in their head in case a situation warranted it.
Don't take other programs lightly, they too do their homework!
Coaches, (in my opinion) that do good jobs are Coach Faire in Ellensburg, Affholter, Goins, Smeenk (Sunnyside Chr.), Winters, Raab, and I'm sure the list can go on, but sometimes it depends on the caliber of athletes you have.
To me, the Coaches that produce the most when they have very little, is what is most IMPRESSIVE!!!!!
Don't take other programs lightly, they too do their homework!
Coaches, (in my opinion) that do good jobs are Coach Faire in Ellensburg, Affholter, Goins, Smeenk (Sunnyside Chr.), Winters, Raab, and I'm sure the list can go on, but sometimes it depends on the caliber of athletes you have.
To me, the Coaches that produce the most when they have very little, is what is most IMPRESSIVE!!!!!
Col-pul, I don't think you know much about Coach Affholter. He has a great coaching record (look up Mabton boys of the early 90's) and has coached these seniors for 6 years. He is very well versed in X's and O's and he knows how to coach. If you knew more about him I don't think you'd say that coaching would be the difference in Granger and LaSalle.
Letitbesaid, I have no problem with people disagreeing with me but I'd be interested in your opinion on Klarich, not just that I'm "off the mark". I think she is on par with any 1A PG this year but am open to other names. I believe she will be able to play at the cc level. Great ballhandler, good shooter, passer, high bb IQ.
Letitbesaid, I have no problem with people disagreeing with me but I'd be interested in your opinion on Klarich, not just that I'm "off the mark". I think she is on par with any 1A PG this year but am open to other names. I believe she will be able to play at the cc level. Great ballhandler, good shooter, passer, high bb IQ.
I know she was a 2 time 1st teamer, but to whose standards?
Last year, she played great in the tournament, not necessarily the case in the regular season.
This year at the tournament, I think she averaged about 6 pts a game. Not real worthy of 1st team All-state honors.
McIntyre from Freeman gets 2nd team and Klarich gets 1st team. What is the deal with that?
I know that the media selects the players, but what is the criteria that helps them in their selection? Is it prior accomplishments (which I definitely think is what helped Klarich this year), or tournament play, or a bias towards that individual players school or team?
I just don't think Klarich was the best point guard in the tournament or the state for that Matter.
My personal opinion.
I do want to know what the criteria is though.
Last year, she played great in the tournament, not necessarily the case in the regular season.
This year at the tournament, I think she averaged about 6 pts a game. Not real worthy of 1st team All-state honors.
McIntyre from Freeman gets 2nd team and Klarich gets 1st team. What is the deal with that?
I know that the media selects the players, but what is the criteria that helps them in their selection? Is it prior accomplishments (which I definitely think is what helped Klarich this year), or tournament play, or a bias towards that individual players school or team?
I just don't think Klarich was the best point guard in the tournament or the state for that Matter.
My personal opinion.
I do want to know what the criteria is though.
So points/game is the standard bearer for a good PG?
Here is my opinion regarding Klarich:
I would have to agree with Money. She did so much more for her team than score points. She controlled their game, their offense, the tempo they wanted. I have watched her play for 4 years and have been impressed every time I watch her. Not for her scoring ability but for the way she controls the game. She is like another coach on the floor.
Best in the state? That is an argument that I believe is hard to quantify. Is she in the discussion.... I think so.
From having observed Affholter the past few years, I would put him up there on the list as well. There have been games (Feeman first round 2008, LC second round 2009) that I didn't think they would win, yet he was able to get the girls to buy into his gameplan.
This is not a knock on LaSalle's coaches, I have gotten to know them over the past couple of years and I would agree they are also building (have built!!) a solid program. What Col-Pul says of their D is so true. Have been on a staff that had to deal with that.....ugh!!
I think LaSalle coming into the SCAC will just make it that much better and competitive. In the long run, will make the whole league better by bringing in the caliber of play that they will.
Here is my opinion regarding Klarich:
I would have to agree with Money. She did so much more for her team than score points. She controlled their game, their offense, the tempo they wanted. I have watched her play for 4 years and have been impressed every time I watch her. Not for her scoring ability but for the way she controls the game. She is like another coach on the floor.
Best in the state? That is an argument that I believe is hard to quantify. Is she in the discussion.... I think so.
From having observed Affholter the past few years, I would put him up there on the list as well. There have been games (Feeman first round 2008, LC second round 2009) that I didn't think they would win, yet he was able to get the girls to buy into his gameplan.
This is not a knock on LaSalle's coaches, I have gotten to know them over the past couple of years and I would agree they are also building (have built!!) a solid program. What Col-Pul says of their D is so true. Have been on a staff that had to deal with that.....ugh!!
I think LaSalle coming into the SCAC will just make it that much better and competitive. In the long run, will make the whole league better by bringing in the caliber of play that they will.
I agree that she is a good point guard. Every coach would love to have a floor general on the floor that can make good decisions and control the tempo of your offense.
But, are you saying that an individual that distributes the ball is more important than one that can do that and more? Klarich seemed robotic at times, waiting for Affholter to call every play.
I do think she was a valuable player for Granger, but not the best in the state. Comparing her to the likes of a Baker from Freeman is like apples and oranges.
Baker scored, played defense, distributed the ball, rebounded, and controlled the tempo of the game. She is the best that the 1A had to offer.
But, are you saying that an individual that distributes the ball is more important than one that can do that and more? Klarich seemed robotic at times, waiting for Affholter to call every play.
I do think she was a valuable player for Granger, but not the best in the state. Comparing her to the likes of a Baker from Freeman is like apples and oranges.
Baker scored, played defense, distributed the ball, rebounded, and controlled the tempo of the game. She is the best that the 1A had to offer.
I think your last statement of "apples to oranges" sums up alot of these debates.
I will be the first to admit that when comparing Klarich, I compare her to ones I have seen or known. I have only had the opportunity to watch Baker a couple of times. From what I have heard I would be similarly impressed with her. Whereas I have seen Klarich play a bunch.
Always fun to debate though.
I would agree with you also on all-team selection process. There have been times where I also have had to scratch my head and wondered why player A was put ahead of player B.....Knowing the criteria would be interesting.
I will be the first to admit that when comparing Klarich, I compare her to ones I have seen or known. I have only had the opportunity to watch Baker a couple of times. From what I have heard I would be similarly impressed with her. Whereas I have seen Klarich play a bunch.
Always fun to debate though.
I would agree with you also on all-team selection process. There have been times where I also have had to scratch my head and wondered why player A was put ahead of player B.....Knowing the criteria would be interesting.
Money$$, I'm glad you called me out on this subject. Now, remember, this is just my opinion.
I believe Klarich is a good high school point guard, but if she wants to play at the next level, she will definitely have to work on quite a few things.
Let me start a list if I may:
1. Defending: She was slow throughout high school, thus being the reason ANDY put her on the opposing teams weakest offensive player. She must learn how to defend guards at the next level if she wants to play a majority of the minutes.
2. Shooting: I noticed how you said she was a good shooter. Well, I know she is a streaky shooter, and in order to be considered a threat, she would have to become a consistent shooter.
Two of the three times Granger played against Zillah, she was left open to shoot. I think that had something to do with their game plan, because they didn't seem to be too worried about her shooting (maybe averaged 4 pts in three games against them).
3. Rebounding: She wasn't the one that was going to battle inside for any type of rebound or loose ball. Basically waited for her team to get her the ball and then take instruction from Coach AA.
4. Toughness: This is definitely something she'll need at the next level. Opposing players will be stronger, bigger, and maybe even more talented.
and last, but not least.....
5. Continue to GET BETTER: She has been the same player for the last four years. You can't call someone great if they haven't progressed in a four year span! She didn't do anything different in order to become the player she could be at the next level.
So Money$$, these are a few things that I could think of just off the top of my head about Klarich.
Now, for Coach AA, well, that's a totally different discussion, but I think I'd open your eyes there also!!!
I believe Klarich is a good high school point guard, but if she wants to play at the next level, she will definitely have to work on quite a few things.
Let me start a list if I may:
1. Defending: She was slow throughout high school, thus being the reason ANDY put her on the opposing teams weakest offensive player. She must learn how to defend guards at the next level if she wants to play a majority of the minutes.
2. Shooting: I noticed how you said she was a good shooter. Well, I know she is a streaky shooter, and in order to be considered a threat, she would have to become a consistent shooter.
Two of the three times Granger played against Zillah, she was left open to shoot. I think that had something to do with their game plan, because they didn't seem to be too worried about her shooting (maybe averaged 4 pts in three games against them).
3. Rebounding: She wasn't the one that was going to battle inside for any type of rebound or loose ball. Basically waited for her team to get her the ball and then take instruction from Coach AA.
4. Toughness: This is definitely something she'll need at the next level. Opposing players will be stronger, bigger, and maybe even more talented.
and last, but not least.....
5. Continue to GET BETTER: She has been the same player for the last four years. You can't call someone great if they haven't progressed in a four year span! She didn't do anything different in order to become the player she could be at the next level.
So Money$$, these are a few things that I could think of just off the top of my head about Klarich.
Now, for Coach AA, well, that's a totally different discussion, but I think I'd open your eyes there also!!!
Well, I Think you have some valid points. I judged Klarich from the games I've watched her play, quite a few over the years. I don't look for a PG be a great rebounder or even a big scorer. Those things are nice but I think of a PG as someone who sets the offense and distributes the ball. I think Klarich's ppg may have been down this year but I just think that that wasn't her role so much. It didn't seem like she looked to score alot. I know she has been invited byCBC's coach to come to some of their recruiting camps. Defensively, when you're on a team with Zapien, Mengerelli, and Carpenter, ya you may not be the defensive stopper. Is she the best? I don't know. But to be a four year starter on that team and to win the honors that she has I think we can AGREE that she's pretty good. Didn't mean to "call you out" just asking for your thoughts. And I think you made some good ones.
Now........about AA. I'm calling you out. Back up your last statement. LOL
Now........about AA. I'm calling you out. Back up your last statement. LOL
Col-pul, I love your statement "the difference between programs like LaSalle and Granger is an understanding of how to win games.". I know you're smart enough to know how many games these girls have won the last four years, not to mention jr high and AAU. That is hilarious. Keep in mind this program has been every bit the program LaSalle has over the last four years against much much stronger competition.
Money$$, I love it, you are truly an advocate of High School sports and a class act to boot, but I wish you would look at other teams, instead of the teams that are in the "front runners" position.
Now, to Coach AA. He is truly a good coach, but I want to see what he does with little talent.
It's easy to win when you have talent - correct?
Let's see what he can do over the next "TWO" years, and I stress two because he won't have Mengarelli after next year.
Now, ask yourself this question(s). Why do individuals resurvice to coach after a long layoff? Is it because they missed it? Is it because they have to scratch that "itch" thats been plaguing them for so long? Is it becauce their children have quit playing and graduated? or is it because there is a team that's loaded coming through the ranks?
Most of the time it's because of the latter. It's because they know the caliber team they may have and the potential that's there. Case in Point - Triplett at Eisenhower (later retired because talent was gone), or a Joe Blodgett (one and done stint in White Swan) because all the SENIORS graguated.
What I'm simply trying to say is that it is easy to coach talent, but when you're down in that department, that's when the true coach reveals him/herself.
I remember playing against the Mabton teams that Coach AA had. After they were gone, where did he go? Hmm.... Nobody seems to remember, except for the fact that he resurviced four years ago!
He is a good coach, but has the tendency to get "Out Coached" at times. If you don't know what I'm talking about, then you truly are lost in the matter.
I don't like it when people say "oh, Granger just dind't play well", or "The other team was bad and they played down to their level." It boils down to others simply out smarting him and being a better Chess player!
He's a good guy, but don't put all of you eggs in one basket!!!!
"Excuses are the nails used to build a house of failure"
Now, to Coach AA. He is truly a good coach, but I want to see what he does with little talent.
It's easy to win when you have talent - correct?
Let's see what he can do over the next "TWO" years, and I stress two because he won't have Mengarelli after next year.
Now, ask yourself this question(s). Why do individuals resurvice to coach after a long layoff? Is it because they missed it? Is it because they have to scratch that "itch" thats been plaguing them for so long? Is it becauce their children have quit playing and graduated? or is it because there is a team that's loaded coming through the ranks?
Most of the time it's because of the latter. It's because they know the caliber team they may have and the potential that's there. Case in Point - Triplett at Eisenhower (later retired because talent was gone), or a Joe Blodgett (one and done stint in White Swan) because all the SENIORS graguated.
What I'm simply trying to say is that it is easy to coach talent, but when you're down in that department, that's when the true coach reveals him/herself.
I remember playing against the Mabton teams that Coach AA had. After they were gone, where did he go? Hmm.... Nobody seems to remember, except for the fact that he resurviced four years ago!
He is a good coach, but has the tendency to get "Out Coached" at times. If you don't know what I'm talking about, then you truly are lost in the matter.
I don't like it when people say "oh, Granger just dind't play well", or "The other team was bad and they played down to their level." It boils down to others simply out smarting him and being a better Chess player!
He's a good guy, but don't put all of you eggs in one basket!!!!
"Excuses are the nails used to build a house of failure"
I have said many times on this board that a good basketball team is 80% players and 20% coaching. Maybe 70-30. I think coaches get too much credit and too much blame. If you reread my first post on this thread I said Granger will fall fast and hard next year. Not because AA will forget how to coach but beacause Mengerelli and Fantasia cannot carry this team. There are many examples of programs going thru highs and lows with the same coach. Burge and Elder (EV) come to mind. Were they great coaches who "lost it"? Nah the talent level went bye-bye.
How about the coaches that have lost the talent but have still produced? Is it still 80% players and 20% coaching? More like 50% - 50% in my opinion!
True programs continue to be in the same spot year after year, no matter if the talent is there or not.
Thank you for your honest opinions. I'm sure we'll continue to comment on one anothers posts. It has been fun!
True programs continue to be in the same spot year after year, no matter if the talent is there or not.
Thank you for your honest opinions. I'm sure we'll continue to comment on one anothers posts. It has been fun!
I try not to comment on boys basketball that much, but if you want my opinion, we'll have to take this conversation to the boys board!
Something tells me you'll be "all ears", wanting to know my opinion....
Something tells me you'll be "all ears", wanting to know my opinion....
Well if a Gold Ball were on the line and I had to place a bet I'd take LaSalle, wouldn't spot any points against Granger but I'd take the Lighening nonetheless. You differ and that's fine, it's a bet we'll never get to make.
But here's the thing, we will see next season how LaSalle does amongst the giants.
But here's the thing, we will see next season how LaSalle does amongst the giants.
Thought it would be interesting to revisit this thread. Alot of interesting comments here.
LaSalle has lived up to the hype this year. And yes I still think they have a great chance at the gold ball. However, Granger has far exceeded my expectations. Congrats to Andy and his players. To lose what they did and now be where they are is a testament to all of them. Zillah is a huge disappointment. They didn't lose a ton of talent and should be improved this year. I think they have regressed. I'm beginning to think my statement of coaching being 20% of a factor and talent being 80% is off a bit. I can look at Zillah and Granger and throw note credit/blame to the coaching. Thoughts anyone?
LaSalle has lived up to the hype this year. And yes I still think they have a great chance at the gold ball. However, Granger has far exceeded my expectations. Congrats to Andy and his players. To lose what they did and now be where they are is a testament to all of them. Zillah is a huge disappointment. They didn't lose a ton of talent and should be improved this year. I think they have regressed. I'm beginning to think my statement of coaching being 20% of a factor and talent being 80% is off a bit. I can look at Zillah and Granger and throw note credit/blame to the coaching. Thoughts anyone?
You are correct is some of the things that you've stated. LaSalle has lived up to the hype.
Granger might have exceeded "your" expectations, but to those that know the game, they knew that Granger would still be a tough opponent on a regular basis.
Zillah might be somewhat of a disappointment to some, but you still have to consider that they are a really young team. Three seniors, three juniors (two played last year), and four sophomores. Yes, they did return a very large portion of the team, but remember, it's not how they start, but how they finish.
You don't see too many teams this year that are led by sophomores, and that's what makes Zillah a scary team.
Good luck to all!!!!!
"For every finger you point at someone, you have three pointing back at you"
Granger might have exceeded "your" expectations, but to those that know the game, they knew that Granger would still be a tough opponent on a regular basis.
Zillah might be somewhat of a disappointment to some, but you still have to consider that they are a really young team. Three seniors, three juniors (two played last year), and four sophomores. Yes, they did return a very large portion of the team, but remember, it's not how they start, but how they finish.
You don't see too many teams this year that are led by sophomores, and that's what makes Zillah a scary team.
Good luck to all!!!!!
"For every finger you point at someone, you have three pointing back at you"
Much love for "Double A", but why so much hatred for Zillah?
We don't know of the high's and lows that coaches and players deal with. All that we, as fans can do, is point out the very obvious and be the one's that love to thrive off of the success and/or failure of those we love, and/or those we love to hate.
All I'm saying is, don't be so quick to point the finger at the leader, when you need to take a look at what's actually going on while the game is in progress (on the floor).
I really wonder why you follow Zillah so closely, when it's very obvious that you are not a fan? And if you are a fan, be supportive and know that mistakes happen.
Zillah has lost some close games this year, games that they probably should have won, but I attribute that to them still having that mystique about them and teams wanting to beat them. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong, but so far, they've still had a decent season, the kind that most teams would love to be a part of.
Oh yeah, I got love for you too Money! Lol
Don't let me get under your skin
We don't know of the high's and lows that coaches and players deal with. All that we, as fans can do, is point out the very obvious and be the one's that love to thrive off of the success and/or failure of those we love, and/or those we love to hate.
All I'm saying is, don't be so quick to point the finger at the leader, when you need to take a look at what's actually going on while the game is in progress (on the floor).
I really wonder why you follow Zillah so closely, when it's very obvious that you are not a fan? And if you are a fan, be supportive and know that mistakes happen.
Zillah has lost some close games this year, games that they probably should have won, but I attribute that to them still having that mystique about them and teams wanting to beat them. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong, but so far, they've still had a decent season, the kind that most teams would love to be a part of.
Oh yeah, I got love for you too Money! Lol
Don't let me get under your skin
Zillah was the underdog last year and accomplished way more than anybody thought they would, I'm guessing, even including what you had expected. So, why not just be a fan, cheer them on, be supportive, and lay off them a bit!!!!!!!!!!!!
So, what about that cup of coffee bud? You let me know!
Oh, and thank you for the "humble" opinion.....
So, what about that cup of coffee bud? You let me know!
Oh, and thank you for the "humble" opinion.....