The Valparaiso Beacons Fan Zone Forum

  Grade the 2017-18 season for Valpo Basketball

D.  Highly disappointing season, though we showed some progress in the last 10 games.

F.
I am not going to get into the results of this year - Last place and one-and-done in the conference tournament kinda speak for themselves.
I am more disappointed with the development phase and "the process". Next year, we will have a team with no returning seniors, none of the 3 freshmen of this year make me look forward to see them next year, and I can't say that the returning sophomores (Smitts and Sorolla) are better today than they were at the end of their freshman season.
I am very disappointed.   :(

Got to be a D just based on results.  Given our youth and the tremendous hole that we turned out to have at the four which, given our two bigs being below average on the boards, pretty much doomed the season.

C.  All of these sophomores are starting to come around.

Not having a 4 has been a nightmare, although our 4 and sometimes 5 guard lineups have kept us in more games than I imagined they would.

D team performance
F  university administration support
D adult fan support
F  student support
D- avg.

F. 10th place, an overall losing record, loss in first round of tournament: A disappointment on and off the court and at every level: administration, coaches, players, students, officials, etc.

Lottich getting technicals - F.
Parking situation - F.
President Heckler - F.
Conference play - F.
Scheduling - F.
Parking situation - F.
Marijuana scandal - F.
Valpo's Twitter account - F.
Parking situation - F.

I voted C, but that could move to a B- if Valpo wins a few games in the CBI.

F- bad coaching and player development
F- horrible play calling
Valpo university didn't execute well at anything this year...i have no idea how anyone could grade them any better than a D.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

We don't deserve to be in any tournament.  I voted D and that is based on the overall result which includes the loss of Joe Burton.  That was out of Lottich's control.  It changed the dynamics and put freshman is spots that they were not ready to fill.  As for the Administration, what the heck did they do or not do to effect the result?  Should they have started to install chairbacks in the middle of the season?  The team flew everywhere except Loyola.  That is a big dollar commitment and a change from previous years.

I saw improvement year over year from Derrik and Micah, once his role was redefined, played very solid minutes.  His assist to turnover ratio was the best on the team, other than Kiser who didn't have nearly the total opportunities that Micah had.  J seemed to get better on defense.  Golder was a very pleasant surprise and continued to improve as the year went on.  Bakari was and will be a stud going forward.  Kiser was Kiser.  The freshman?  A big disappointment.  I don't see them being a significant part of any future success.  The seniors?  A just average year.  Max did as much as his talent would allow and Tevonn, given the setback of a serious illness, did just OK.

So there you have it.  Pretty much a bust and a D from me.

I gave a D. I think this would have been a noticeably different season if Joe Burton doesn't leave the team for academic issues. I think we'd be a Top 5 team and win a lot more of those close games.

Coaching and player development - I don't know how anyone could give them a F. There was noticeable development from Smits, Bakari, and Golder. Arguably the best players on the team. I think there is room for criticism but let's be real, they didn't do a bad job. They deserve criticism for not recruiting a ready PF. The PF position was a such a glaring weakness. They could have added a patch work grad-transfer. I think it would be wise to do that this offseason to take pressure off Mileek. I'm sure Mileek will grow next season.

This season was just really unsatisfactory. I think most of us knew it would a tough year losing AP, Shane and Jubril but it was worse then I thought it would be. We dealt with off court issues again with Joe not cutting it in the classroom and Micah's misdemeanor. It wasn't a good season but I think it's important to point out the future is bright. We're young and we'll continue to get better.

I gave a D only because I lived through the 5-22 seasons of the early 90s, which would have been F's.

D.   It would have been an F only if absolutely nothing positive occurred.  Some Positives - Marcus and Bakari, the kids never gave up on the season.

Mileek is a Jekyl and Hyde with better size and speed.

His offensive potential is enormous so I give that an   A+.

His defensive struggles are unmatched in recent memory  F.

McMillan could be playing 8 minutes per game in 2018-19 or 28. It will all depend on his defense.

Quote from: justducky on March 02, 2018, 11:53:13 AM
Mileek is a Jekyl and Hyde with better size and speed.

His offensive potential is enormous so I give that an   A+.

His defensive struggles are unmatched in recent memory  F.

McMillan could be playing 8 minutes per game in 2018-19 or 28. It will all depend on his defense.

100% agree. It's pretty clear the key to getting minutes from Coach Lottich is playing good defense. Kiser is offensively challenged but defends and rebounds so he earned an average of 18.2 minutes per game this season.

C-. With Peters gone, I expected a down season for Valpo. I also expect the Fighting Crusaders to be better next year.

C-
We all got swept in by the early success and I think built unreasonable expectations for a team that lost 3 players playing professionally plus a starter at Boise State. This before Burton left and Walker got sick.

My score reflects our effort and ability to keep scores close offset by our inability to win games we could/should have.

D.  I grade based on objective performance.  C means average.  D is below average.  We lost more than we won, therefore D.

I am pleased with the progress over the second half.  This team had the life sucked out of it when Joe Burton left and when Tevonn got sick.  Talk about a team dead in the water!  Regardless, players improved, the defense started to improve, and players started picking up the offensive slack, especially Golder, Bakari, and Smits.

Over the off-season, the guys will get older, they will continue to learn how to play as a team.  This is a sophomore-laden group.  I hope our bigs (and Mileek) get all they can eat and spend lots of time in the gym.  I'm hopeful that next year we improve to a B.  That would be enough of an improvement for me.

Quote from: justducky on March 02, 2018, 11:53:13 AMMileek is a Jekyl and Hyde with better size and speed.

I couldn't find any fresh scouting reports on either Jekyl or Hyde but both could probably outsmart him and get wide open for easy shots.  ;)

Quote from: truth219 on March 02, 2018, 08:54:39 AM
F- bad coaching and player development
F- horrible play calling
Valpo university didn't execute well at anything this year...i have no idea how anyone could grade them any better than a D.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

You're entitled to your wrong opinion.  Anyone who watched them from December through last night could see development.  We all wished that it wasn't as bad to start MVC play, but we were in every game we played down the stretch.  Even the blatant foul-gasm the refs fell for against UNI was a tight game.

If I had replied last night, I'd have been as mad as you.  Luckily I just deleted this thread from my favorites, only to bring it back up less than 24-hours later 😉

"What doesn't kill you makes you stronger"

Regarding development, I have to believe that the Tevonn mono and the Joe withdrawl blew up the whole plan for the season. At that point it was a scramble to reorganize and adjust — just as we were going  into the MVC (and most important) portion of our schedule. In January we were not a very competitive team, but going into February the light bulbs started to come on with all our youngsters. In February our young team pretty much took every opponent to the wall before losing and even won a few.  That to me is progress and that to me shows that our kids were forced to develop and they responded.

I still rate the season as a D for more reasons than the disappointing W-L result (young team /young coach). Others have cited the "ancillary" aspects of the entire first year. That contributed greatly to my overall grade. I think ValpoPal said it best - another missed opportunity.

Quote from: VUSL98 on March 02, 2018, 12:49:32 PM
D.  I grade based on objective performance.  C means average.  D is below average.  We lost more than we won, therefore D.

I am pleased with the progress over the second half.  This team had the life sucked out of it when Joe Burton left and when Tevonn got sick.  Talk about a team dead in the water!  Regardless, players improved, the defense started to improve, and players started picking up the offensive slack, especially Golder, Bakari, and Smits.

Over the off-season, the guys will get older, they will continue to learn how to play as a team.  This is a sophomore-laden group.  I hope our bigs (and Mileek) get all they can eat and spend lots of time in the gym.  I'm hopeful that next year we improve to a B.  That would be enough of an improvement for me.

And learn how to rebound and dunk.

Vocal leadership/energy of staff during games- D (once, Gore stood up for the team, and it was amazing). Somebody has to be a vocal leader.
Parking situation - F.
President Heckler - N/A - only saw him at one game. Last year, AP barely acknowledged him when he became all-time leader and while free Jubril thing going on.
Conference play - D
Scheduling - D
Control of players (transfers, drinking, drugs, academics) - F.
Player Rotations - D ... seriously feel for Parker and haven't seen a single other program start players and then bench them for the rest of each half.
Appreciation of season ticket holders - F.
Parking situation - F.
Facilities - D-
Student section - D
Excuses and over reliance on trusting the process and blaming things on inexperience and age - D-
Player effort - B+
Seniors - A
Golder - A

Need J to transfer, along with others.

Hope for the incoming freshmen - A

Belief that coaches/leadership will listen - B

I've mentioned it before but I think this program is at a crossroads. We're 3 years removed for a near miss at the NCAA tournament. 2 years from an NIT final game. Yet since then, this program has taken some major hits. We're still standing but I've questioned how much more this program can take.

First the good news. This program has shown signs of life in the last month. Evelyn and Golder have come into their own. Smits has shown signs of breaking out. We have Fazekas eligible to play next year and at least one highly ranked recruit. In sum, we have something that resembles a solid core of players. We won't be this bad next year. Guaranteed.

The bad news. I'm deeply concerned about the support this program is receiving from the university. The lack of students showing up is merely a symptom, I fear. We've had a very successful past few years but I'm afraid we have not maximized our opportunities. As others have indicated, the game atmosphere hasn't changed since our days in the Mid-Con. I've seen this in other parts of the university as well: going through the motions, lack of creativity, etc. Doing this like we've always done them isn't an option at this point. If we are not improving, then we're falling behind.

In sum, this season was brutal but better than the 9-22 season we had in 2008-2009. I remain optimistic about Valpo basketball.

Quote from: VU2010 on March 03, 2018, 10:33:52 AM

Need J to transfer, along with others.

I'm assuming you mean our best remaining defender Sorolla?  Mighty short sighted, I feel that he's a better all around player for most of the last two years at the position.

I'd label J as one of the core (5) players I do not want to transfer.  We can get scoring from the SF, SG and PG position and surely we need development / transfers from the PF slot.  Derrik and J are about as complimentary as we could ask for at our tiny Lutheran university.  Boy I disagree wholeheartedly on that statement if I'm reading it correctly.  There's always a chance I'm not.

You're right. I'm just emotional about it all at the time, lol. J is a better defender. He frustrates me on O. Seriously seems like he doesn't look at the basket and often doesn't square his shoulders up. We will be better next year. No doubt. I'm sure there's way more going on behind the scenes, as is the case with everything in life, that us fans don't realize. Coaching from the couch is much easier. I would love to see the Admins show their support for this program. We're in a great conference. No comparison to the Mid C or Horizon. Huge opportunities. Just need to seize the moment.

I think the ratings from WH a few posts back are concise and I agree with all of them.   

On other note:  interesting that all four of the Illinois teams made the semifinals.  No reason I can see.  just interesting.   

Todd Ickow and Paul Oren had a great conversation with Harry Schroeder from ValleyHoopsinsider.com

Start: 03:00 minute mark

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qj4mj7HQLM

https://twitter.com/FatherHarry1/status/969354590234783754

This public whining about the officials isn't going to make us any friends and might actually make the problem worse.

What is with the OVC logo on the Schroeder piece?   Sorry, wrong Valley!

Quote from: VUGrad1314 on March 03, 2018, 03:12:43 PM
This public whining about the officials isn't going to make us any friends and might actually make the problem worse.

Not sure how it can even get worse

I gave it a "C" mainly because of all of the circumstances.  It was the first year in the conference (if I remember right, the first year in the Horizon was not pretty either), the injuries and player losses didn't help.

We will see...

With 43 members voting thus far, the grade point average is 1.3 or a D+.

C- loss of player, Sickness, New Conference, New players new roles, young coaches  yet the team kept growing and got better to the end. The bar will be higher next year( Don't tell the cops were it is) :o 

3 minutes into the shared video,
Todd made it very clear. His biggest takeaway pertains to the perfect size of midmajor arenas and the support of admins and fans. Bingo. Anybody else notice that????

Quote from: VUfan on March 03, 2018, 08:10:22 PM
C- loss of player, Sickness, New Conference, New players new roles, young coaches  yet the team kept growing and got better to the end. The bar will be higher next year( Don't tell the cops were it is) :o 

Quote from: bmlvu97 on March 03, 2018, 05:39:00 PM
I gave it a "C" mainly because of all of the circumstances.  It was the first year in the conference (if I remember right, the first year in the Horizon was not pretty either), the injuries and player losses didn't help.

We will see...

I originally gave a D. Looking back I'd probably give a C- due to circumstances of what some others pointed out. Regardless a very disappointing season and things must change for the better going forward.

For all of you, including faculty members, who are all over the Administration for not supporting the team.  I have a question:  How do you know that a full court press isn't underway to raise the money to make the changes sought?  We are expecting millions of dollars and these things don't happen over night.  I just am amazed at the negative vibes thrown around here.  Give us the inside scoop as to all the things you know about the Administration's sabotaging the basketball program. Please!!

Quote from: vu72 on March 03, 2018, 10:09:04 PM
For all of you, including faculty members, who are all over the Administration for not supporting the team.  I have a question:  How do you know that a full court press isn't underway to raise the money to make the changes sought?  We are expecting millions of dollars and these things don't happen over night.  I just am amazed at the negative vibes thrown around here.  Give us the inside scoop as to all the things you know about the Administration's sabotaging the basketball program. Please!!

To me it's all about the history. We've had 20 years to get some things done. The VU administration got very little accomplished for it's marquee sport. With that track record one can reasonably assume the same type of support will be given to the MBB program in the next ten years. If they would like to prove me wrong, come up with a $14 million donor and unveil a huge expansion program that benefits MBB then I would be ecstatic to hear about it.

Quote from: vu72 on March 03, 2018, 10:09:04 PM
For all of you, including faculty members, who are all over the Administration for not supporting the team.  I have a question:  How do you know that a full court press isn't underway to raise the money to make the changes sought?  We are expecting millions of dollars and these things don't happen over night.  I just am amazed at the negative vibes thrown around here.  Give us the inside scoop as to all the things you know about the Administration's sabotaging the basketball program. Please!!

Because we don't know and probably will never know, we are forced to draw conclusions. The administration is not even partially transparent about its plans. I cannot even recall a trial balloon or a vision statement supported by some visual ideas that tells loyal fans what this administration aspires to with respect to improving the athletics department (inside of 30 years). ML's statement about the ARC on USH is symbolic of the overall upper management attitude that he reports to.  72, unless this administration begins to communicate ideas and vision to its caring constituents relative to athletics, it will continue to receive the questioning and negative feedback it is getting here. It is about positive, forward thinking management style and the Valpo management style is sorely lacking in inclusiveness — not the PC inclusiveness everyone talks about, just the regular alumni, fan, student, interested public inclusiveness in the affairs of a university we care about.

Shoot, no one even has a visual of what the ARC will look like 20 years from now AFTER we build the rec center everyone is talking about. Come to think of it, we as alumni and fans don't even have a visual of the envisioned rec center. Hmmmm. Maybe there is no rec center.

Quote from: VULB#62 on March 03, 2018, 10:45:05 PM

Quote from: vu72 on March 03, 2018, 10:09:04 PM
For all of you, including faculty members, who are all over the Administration for not supporting the team.  I have a question:  How do you know that a full court press isn't underway to raise the money to make the changes sought?  We are expecting millions of dollars and these things don't happen over night.  I just am amazed at the negative vibes thrown around here.  Give us the inside scoop as to all the things you know about the Administration's sabotaging the basketball program. Please!!

Because we don't know and probably will never know, we are forced to draw conclusions. The administration is not even partially transparent about its plans. I cannot even recall a trial balloon or a vision statement supported by some visual ideas that tells loyal fans what this administration aspires to with respect to improving the athletics department (inside of 30 years). ML's statement about the ARC on USH is symbolic of the overall upper management attitude that he reports to.  72, unless this administration begins to communicate ideas and vision to its caring constituents relative to athletics, it will continue to receive the questioning and negative feedback it is getting here. It is about positive, forward thinking management style and the Valpo management style is sorely lacking in inclusiveness — not the PC inclusiveness everyone talks about, just the regular alumni, fan, student, interested public inclusiveness in the affairs of a university we care about.

Shoot, no one even has a visual of what the ARC will look like 20 years from now AFTER we build the rec center everyone is talking about. Come to think of it, we as alumni and fans don't even have a visual of the envisioned rec center. Hmmmm. Maybe there is no rec center.

Maybe this is the wrong university to be supporting when wanting to support a university to use MBB to actually grow the mission set forth by the board of the university. For some universities MBB and athletics is not a proper tool for these purposes. I sincerely hope this MBB program will become what I see as a useful tool that other Christian liberal arts schools have used to further it's mission as a school. Did God actually say thou shalt not use athletics to further your mission?

Quote from: VULB#62 on March 03, 2018, 10:45:05 PM

Quote from: vu72 on March 03, 2018, 10:09:04 PM
For all of you, including faculty members, who are all over the Administration for not supporting the team.  I have a question:  How do you know that a full court press isn't underway to raise the money to make the changes sought?  We are expecting millions of dollars and these things don't happen over night.  I just am amazed at the negative vibes thrown around here.  Give us the inside scoop as to all the things you know about the Administration's sabotaging the basketball program. Please!!

Because we don't know and probably will never know, we are forced to draw conclusions. The administration is not even partially transparent about its plans. I cannot even recall a trial balloon or a vision statement supported by some visual ideas that tells loyal fans what this administration aspires to with respect to improving the athletics department (inside of 30 years). ML's statement about the ARC on USH is symbolic of the overall upper management attitude that he reports to.  72, unless this administration begins to communicate ideas and vision to its caring constituents relative to athletics, it will continue to receive the questioning and negative feedback it is getting here. It is about positive, forward thinking management style and the Valpo management style is sorely lacking in inclusiveness — not the PC inclusiveness everyone talks about, just the regular alumni, fan, student, interested public inclusiveness in the affairs of a university we care about.

Shoot, no one even has a visual of what the ARC will look like 20 years from now AFTER we build the rec center everyone is talking about. Come to think of it, we as alumni and fans don't even have a visual of the envisioned rec center. Hmmmm. Maybe there is no rec center.

Understood and agree about the lack of transparency.  The problem is that it is "the Valpo way" probably going back to the conservative Lutheran pastors in 1925.  Still, they took a BIG risk!
I was trying to find an announcement about the new science building.  What I found was an announcement about the groundbreaking on the day it happened!

I also found this interesting from the same article:

During the past few years, Valpo engaged faculty members, architects and a professional laboratory consultant to identify priorities and develop an efficient plan of action to meet long-term student needs.

Now, they have more than a few years to make a plan but the conservative nature of not only this administration but those going before, would indicate that there well be plans and studies underway but they won't be announced, even conceptually, until the funding is in place.  :(

Yeah, I find it disheartening.  And I don't know if that is even traditionally "conservative."  Conservative, in my mind, is careful use of financial resources coupled with methodical planning.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with that philosophy.  But nowhere in there should that mean not sharing these careful plans as they evolve as a means of creating enthusiasm and support. Every business I have ever been associated with and consulted to maintained a rolling 3-5 year business plan that implemented a higher set of measurable strategies and shared both with employees and customers/shareholders.  In that way it let these stakeholders know that THERE IS A PLAN.

I guess it just is what it is  :(

It places fans in a wait and see what happens mode, rather than a mode of anticipation.  Probably why we see such generally tepid support for anything these days.

Quote from: VULB#62 on March 04, 2018, 01:11:45 PM
Yeah, I find it disheartening.  And I don't know if that is even traditionally "conservative."  Conservative, in my mind, is careful use of financial resources coupled with methodical planning.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with that philosophy.  But nowhere in there should that mean not sharing these careful plans as they evolve as a means of creating enthusiasm and support. Every business I have ever been associated with and consulted to maintained a rolling 3-5 year business plan that implemented a higher set of measurable strategies and shared both with employees and customers/shareholders.  In that way it let these stakeholders know that THERE IS A PLAN.

I guess it just is what it is  :(

It places fans in a wait and see what happens mode, rather than a mode of anticipation.  Probably why we see such generally tepid support for anything these days.

I don't expect a lick of information shared.  My minimal contributions qualify be for zip. 

I'm not sure that broadcasting their business on message boards or to unqualified ppl like me gets them anywhere.  Are any of you high net worth alumni or otherwise involved....oh wait, you'd probably not want publicity either.  Hmm

This is not a public university last I checked.

The 2017-18 season is officially over. Valpo will not be pursuing a postseason tourney.

https://twitter.com/MichaelOsipoff/status/970741290156556288

I'm happy the season is over. I'm excited about our future but it was time to be finished with this disappointing season.

We could have paid money for practice time but I'm not sure it would have been worth it with this team. These core guys will have chances at postseason experience in the future. Tevonn and Max have been to NCAA Tournament and NIT championship and wouldn't need these few meaningless games.

I very much agree that the last place team in a conference, should not participate in a postseason tournament.  We have higher expectations than such a thing...