Jump to content

Molinari


Recommended Posts

Noticing on a few boards that I've toured recently that there's a lot of Molinari hate out there and I'm not sure I understand where that's coming from.

 

I don't think I've ever seen an assistant coach get blamed for losses in the history of Nebraska basketball.  Until these days.

 

I've seen posters step in and say don't blame the officials, but I've never seen anyone come to the defense of an assistant coach.

 

Someone want to explain this to me?

 

OK, Molinari is known for defense and we get blown out at home by Purdue.

 

Is that Molinari's fault or is that a function of the fact that Purdue is a balanced team and we don't have anyone who can defend the post by himself?  (Ed Morrow actually did a pretty damn good job of it, though.)

 

Miles has often said you try to take away one thing that the other team does, but you can't take away everything so you have to kind of pick your poison.

 

If you double the post, which we have to do, then you leave yourself exposed on the perimeter and a team like Purdue is capable of taking advantage of that. 

 

So, fine, take away the perimeter, and then Hammons is going to get dunks on the inside because we simply have no one on our roster who can cover him without help.

 

Thanks a lot, Molinari.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get it either. This guy is a major Chicago connect. I'm not sure we get the new blood without him. Defense is not our problem at all. Personnel is, and he's helped tremendously in that department. Tai is the most improved defensive player I've ever seen at UNL, and that improvement happened under Molinari. Offense will come if we get a true 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm waiting to see us get some personnel in before I blame him.  But I think people are quick to because we've seen the drop off take place correspond with his tenure.

 

 

You probably weren't around earlier when we had this exact same discussion, but as I explained quite in depth at the time, this is absolutely one of the lamest narratives out there.

 

Let's not go there again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm waiting to see us get some personnel in before I blame him.  But I think people are quick to because we've seen the drop off take place correspond with his tenure.

 

 

You probably weren't around earlier when we had this exact same discussion, but as I explained quite in depth at the time, this is absolutely one of the lamest narratives out there.

 

Let's not go there again.

 

I'm not going there.   Which is why I said, I'm waiting for some personnel issues to clear up for making a decision.  Just saying I think that's why there is dislike for him.  We seemingly had momentum and positivity moving forward in the program then he steps in and we've had two poor years.   From a 30,000 foot view perspective....I can see some would gravitate towards that conclusion.   There is clearly more to be considered.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stupid narrative in my opinion.  Key recruiter for Watson and Roby.  Our identity is GATA defense and Mo teaches it very well.   We slipped on D a this year because of youth (and size) but they will be better. 

 

And yes we need offense too, especially shooters but I think you recruit offensive talent and teach defense.

 

I liked Craig Smith a lot and I did not understand or like seeing Harriman go, but to me suggesting that Molinari is the reason for any of our issues is like saying that someone brings the weather with them when they travel somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK Norm, you've convinced me. I'm going to take it easy on coach Mo. My opinion was mostly based a high level view that lacks a lot of details. In the end I'd like to see us have a few years of stability in our coaching. I guess when things are going bad the natural inclination is that someone has to be blamed and I gravitated towards coach Mo. They guy is a wealth of college basketball knowledge and has tremendous connections in Chicago. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron, I was thinking of starting this thread long before your recent post where you mentioned Mo.  So, I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else for that matter.  I just want someone to explain the whole "Blame Mo" thing.

 

When Smith left and Mo joined the staff, we went from an NCAA tourney team one season to a bad team the next, despite returning an almost intact roster from the tourney run.

 

However, the Smith-for-Mo swap is hardly the only variable in the equation.

 

Walter Pitchford, for example, went from a 41% 3-pt shooter during our NCAA year (including 50% during that stretch run) to a 29% shooter the following season.  What would that have to do with Mo?  And did Smith make Walt the guy who could hit those deep balls or was there something else going on?

 

Two years ago, Shavon was a 31% 3-point shooter; last year he dropped to 19.5%.  Is that because we replaced Craig Smith with Jim Molinari?

 

I've heard Miles say that the team never recovered its mojo last year after consecutive losses to Creighton and Incarnate Word.  That'd be pretty crazy, IMO, to blame two losses on a new assistant one-fourth of the way into his first season with the club.

 

So, we go from a tourney run under the guidance of de facto head coach Craig Smith and falter the next season under his replacement.  Coincidence?

 

Yeah, actually, I think it probably was a coincidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree with you Norm.  I don't base my perception of Coach Mo on the Purdue game.  I look at more the Penn State game where we felt we need to double team down in the post (yet again) and got killed by the only 2 guys hurting us cause we left them alone.  It is easy for good teams to figure out we are going to bring a guard down to double team and a good post player just kicks the ball out for a wide open shot since we can't rotate over fast enough. 

 

I get it that against teams like Purdue, we have to double but against other teams, we don't.  Yet Coach Mo's philosophy is to double all over the place.  Just seems to me that we were much better defensively before he came on staff.  I'm not saying everything thing is his fault but he isn't totally blameless either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree with you Norm.  I don't base my perception of Coach Mo on the Purdue game.  I look at more the Penn State game where we felt we need to double team down in the post (yet again) and got killed by the only 2 guys hurting us cause we left them alone.  It is easy for good teams to figure out we are going to bring a guard down to double team and a good post player just kicks the ball out for a wide open shot since we can't rotate over fast enough. 

 

I get it that against teams like Purdue, we have to double but against other teams, we don't.  Yet Coach Mo's philosophy is to double all over the place.  Just seems to me that we were much better defensively before he came on staff.  I'm not saying everything thing is his fault but he isn't totally blameless either.

Well.  It's Miles' ship.  Miles knows better than any of us if Mo is or isn't getting the job done.

 

Riley parted ways with his DL coach after one season.  Miles has 2 million really good reasons to part with any assistant who isn't making the team and program better.

 

If Miles retains him, it'll be because Miles thinks he's getting it done.  And it's Miles' job on the line if he's wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Noticing on a few boards that I've toured recently that there's a lot of Molinari hate out there and I'm not sure I understand where that's coming from.

 

I don't think I've ever seen an assistant coach get blamed for losses in the history of Nebraska basketball.  Until these days.

 

Don't worry about it, Norm.  They're Donald Trump supporters.   ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's great Molinari has the connections to get us guys like Roby, Morrow and Watson. I think more of my concern with him initially was more that we were losing Craig Smith. My general feeling is that of late offense is more of our problem than defense. Then we lose a solid offensive assistant and replace him with a more defensive-minded assistant. I guess we were going to lose Smith eventually but I'm just not sure Molinari was the best hire. I feel more like he's been a solid hire now than I initially did.

Overall we are probably going to have to hang our hat on defense ... I'm just not sure Miles knows how to adequately coach offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with Coach Mo unless Coach Miles has a problem with Coach Mo.  I am an advocate that everything evolves around the head coach.  If the head coach provides clear expectations and the assistant coach fails to meet or exceed those expectations, it then is on the head coach to make the right decision.  Kind of like Coach Riley had to do with Coach Hughes. 

 

Coach Mo has been at this game a long time.  He knows his poop.  I do not see the issue quite frankly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just not sure Miles knows how to adequately coach offense.

 

It's a big part of the reason he's moved up the ladder the way he has. 

Our offensive efficiency and eFG% have really taken the jump you'd expect from the 4th year of a Miles coached team and they're going to increase next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never thought Molinari was the cause; I thought Smith's departure was the cause.

 

Molinari is Smith's replacement, so he catches the flack for not bringing the same things to the table that Smith brought.  That isn't fair though because Molinari's strength's were never the same as Smith's strengths.

 

Now, a fair question may be whether the team is actually benefiting from Molinari's strengths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never thought Molinari was the cause; I thought Smith's departure was the cause.

 

Molinari is Smith's replacement, so he catches the flack for not bringing the same things to the table that Smith brought.  That isn't fair though because Molinari's strength's were never the same as Smith's strengths.

 

Now, a fair question may be whether the team is actually benefiting from Molinari's strengths.

I don't think Molinari's arrival or Smith's departure is the cause of anything. Just because things happened at the same time is not always or even usually significant. We are talking about different teams with different chemistry and different pieces. Correlation does not equal causation.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many offenses and defenses can be truly enhanced by a versatile big man.  Perhaps one who protects the paint on the defensive end and one with solid enough offensive numbers capable of drawing defenders away from the shooters.  Hmmm, interesting concept.  I am sure such a man is never in the thoughts of a coach at any level in basketball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...