The Road to a Disastrous Season--and to Hope

1. The Griz lose Rorie, Oguine and Krslovic--three of the elite players in the history of Montana basketball. But for one more season they retain another elite player, Pridgett, and combined with two other quality seniors, Samuelson and Manuel, they keep Montana in the upper echelons of the Big Sky--before Covid hits and shuts everything down.

2. How does our staff respond to the loss of all this talent in two years? They go out and recruit possibly the best back-to-back classes in the history of the school. First Carter-Hollinger, Vazquez and Owens, followed by Bannon, Beasely and Whitney. And let's not forget Eddie Egun, who's taken a redshirt year and is still only a sophomore. That's seven quality underclassmen now in the fold.

3. But now you approach the season. You're Montana. You don't rebuild, you reload. You're expected to be among the top teams in the conference. But you've only got three sophomores and an incoming freshman class that you know nothing about. So what do you do? You fill in with transfers, all with experience: Henderson, Steadman, Satterwhite, Gaskin. If you're citay, you think to yourself, "This team is loaded."

4. But lo! The incoming freshman class is better than expected! First game against Pac12 power U.S.C., Bannon is a suprise starter! And scores 13 points! Another freshman, Whitney, debuts with 17 points! Wow! These kids be good!

5. Now you've got a built-in tension within the program: A group of upperclassmen, one or two with professional ambitions looking for minutes, the while you're trying to develop this fantastic group of young talent. I believe this may be the reason Satterwhite and Steadman left. These young kids were just too good to be denied, gaining minutes at the expense of the transfers. It was like in an earthquake, where two tectonic plates rubbed against each other until there was a jarring rupture in the entire program.

6. Add in bad luck. Gaskin is dismissed from the squad, and Henderson simply does not pan out. And without three of the transfers making ANY contributions--and Steadman a disappointment--Montana is suddenly in real trouble. BUT...

7. Hope remains! All the youngsters are still here, still playing, still getting minutes. They bring size, muscle, athleticism and shooting ability. If there ever was a year to get a bad year out of your system, none better than this year. And don't forget, if these kids want to, they'll all get an extra of eligibility because of Covid. In a way, this year is a practise year for kids that are gonna do special things before they leave this program.

Great post!

I will go with point 7...that is my feeling also.

The rest deals with the clash of guards and forwards, however let us address the issue of bigs. How do other schools get them and we can't ? Surely the need is there. (will resist from the famous line). If you didn't see last night , watch Sat.

Add in, along with being maybe the youngest team in the nation, the extra difficulty with Covid. Practices cut short and chunks of time missing. Little cohesion possible off the court. Depression of being isolated. Remember, an inexperienced team needs practice time the most.

The hurdles this team faces are real. My hope is that the core sticks it out for four years in this quick transfer environment. If so, they will be special.

Ain't none of those transfers ever gonna sniff any pro league.

citay said:

It was like in an earthquake, where two tectonic plates rubbed against each other until there was a jarring rupture in the entire program.

Click to expand...

Hopefully it isn't like the Hayward fault, that the damage would be so severe as to level a whole program. I honestly think the losses of Steadman, Satterwhite, and Gaskin are merely tremors on a largely stable inter-continental fault line for the reasons you noted.

There has been some minor damage, maybe some cracks in the plaster. I think the lessons learned from this year by not only the players but also coaches will make the program stronger in the long run. If all the pieces stay in place next year, with some added components, this team which has been competitive in spite of the adversity will be scary good.

I really don't see many players leaving, with maybe the exception of one or two, this is a team that could be 10 deep easily for next year. Easy to get excited about next year when you consider what you have seen out of Beasley, Whitney, Bannan, and others in spurts this year. Egun looked aggressive in his mop up duty last night. The cupboard is hardly bare.

Interesting thoughts, Citay. I always enjoy your informative and provocative posts, whether I agree with what is said or not. Thanks for continuing to step up in this forum.

Going back to what Travis said or indicated in his interview on transfers and portal, along with buying into his program and its importance to him and the team. I understand coaches having a system (a large one) that they want or demand all players to buy into. I think those systems do tend to lead to more success. Hauck seems to have his system too.

Travis also talked about how it takes time to learn and buy into a system, and that it's easier for frosh to starting learning and buying into a system (as they don't yet have a college system, or lack thereof, from a prior school). I can see how it's tougher for transfers to adapt, as well as tough for them to accept new roles and stiff competition for minutes.

However, I wonder if, with all of the transfer rule/portal changes, whether basketball coaches in particular can or should continue to try to impose their greater systems on all players, especially transfers. It occurs to me that hoop coaches may be better off adapting and modifying or the talent and personalities on hand. Not letting some transfer have his own rules, of course. But adapting a bit to what the transfer is and brings witth him. Again, Travis admits that it's harder for transfers to adopt and buy in in a year or two.

While I know a coach can't have two systems or two sets off rules, I wonder if Travis is being too hard of some of these transfers. I wish I knew more of the specifics of Steadman and Satterwhite, as well as the transfer to WSU a year ago. It wasn't clear why they left, or whether it ended up being a my way or the highway thing from Travis. I just wonder if all 3 of those things needed to happen. Is the team really better off now, or better off for the future, that these guys moved on were run off.

Personally, I have never been a fan of benching a player, as opposed to giving more minutes and even a start to a player who was really playing well off the bench and earning more minutes.

I don't have any inside info on the Steadman situation, but my reaction is that one just didn't need to happen and it will hurt the team significantly there rest of the season.

The transfer/portal rules are changing the dynamics. Maybe coaches need to adapt a bit more to the changes.

Football is a bit different because losing or chasing off a few players, doesn't usually cause the talent level to change significantly.

Losing Falls and Gaskins hurt too, but they weren't chased off. They both goofed up royally.

I was a runner and not a bball player for a reason so take anything I say with a big grain of salt. That said, I actually liked what I saw against EW last night. The damage inside wasn't a factor in the 2nd half. I think the young guys are smart and incredibly athletic. Egun can rebound. Anderson in a fighter (who fouls I know) and Beasley looks like he could turn into a young leader. Remember the days when it was just assumed incoming freshman wouldn't play unless they were off the charts talented? I actually think we could be more dangerous now. I like the fight this team showed in the 2nd half. I am optimistic that we could still figure it all out and be dangerous in Boise.

Grizrunr said:

I was a runner and not a bball player for a reason so take anything I say with a big grain of salt. That said, I actually liked what I saw against EW last night. The damage inside wasn't a factor in the 2nd half. I think the young guys are smart and incredibly athletic. Egun can rebound. Anderson in a fighter (who fouls I know) and Beasley looks like he could turn into a young leader. Remember the days when it was just assumed incoming freshman wouldn't play unless they were off the charts talented? I actually think we could be more dangerous now. I like the fight this team showed in the 2nd half. I am optimistic that we could still figure it all out and be dangerous in Boise.

Click to expand...

Eastern hit 17 of their first 20 shots. And they weren’t all easy. Hell they were 5/6 on their first 6 3-point attempts. THAT wasn’t going to continue, obviously, but it lasted a LOT longer than anyone thought it would....that made the initial 16 minutes just unbearable as a Griz fan.

Also, Griz currently are #2 in the COUNTRY in FT% made....given the youth on this team, that’s freaking amazing...also means that for the next 3-4 years, FT’s will NOT be an area of worry! :lol: :lol: There is so much upside to the team that its scary....ONE good post presence and this team would take off....

PlayerRep said:

Interesting thoughts, Citay. I always enjoy your informative and provocative posts, whether I agree with what is said or not. Thanks for continuing to step up in this forum.

Going back to what Travis said or indicated in his interview on transfers and portal, along with buying into his program and its importance to him and the team. I understand coaches having a system (a large one) that they want or demand all players to buy into. I think those systems do tend to lead to more success. Hauck seems to have his system too.

Travis also talked about how it takes time to learn and buy into a system, and that it's easier for frosh to starting learning and buying into a system (as they don't yet have a college system, or lack thereof, from a prior school). I can see how it's tougher for transfers to adapt, as well as tough for them to accept new roles and stiff competition for minutes.

However, I wonder if, with all of the transfer rule/portal changes, whether basketball coaches in particular can or should continue to try to impose their greater systems on all players, especially transfers. It occurs to me that hoop coaches may be better off adapting and modifying or the talent and personalities on hand. Not letting some transfer have his own rules, of course. But adapting a bit to what the transfer is and brings witth him. Again, Travis admits that it's harder for transfers to adopt and buy in in a year or two.

While I know a coach can't have two systems or two sets off rules, I wonder if Travis is being too hard of some of these transfers. I wish I knew more of the specifics of Steadman and Satterwhite, as well as the transfer to WSU a year ago. It wasn't clear why they left, or whether it ended up being a my way or the highway thing from Travis. I just wonder if all 3 of those things needed to happen. Is the team really better off now, or better off for the future, that these guys moved on were run off.

Personally, I have never been a fan of benching a player, as opposed to giving more minutes and even a start to a player who was really playing well off the bench and earning more minutes.

I don't have any inside info on the Steadman situation, but my reaction is that one just didn't need to happen and it will hurt the team significantly there rest of the season.

The transfer/portal rules are changing the dynamics. Maybe coaches need to adapt a bit more to the changes.

Football is a bit different because losing or chasing off a few players, doesn't usually cause the talent level to change significantly.

Click to expand...

Steadman had a huge upside as a pretty athletic big guy. But his body language often seemed disinterested. Travis saw him everyday in practice so he probably saw more. But with so many really talented young guys that are basically getting a free redshirt year you have to keep them involved. If some of those freshmen or sophomores walked after this year because they didn't play much that would be a much bigger blow than losing Steadman. Will losing Steadman hurt this year. No doubt. But these young guys getting playing time will pay huge dividends down the road. I don't think it can emphasized enough how disruptive one guy's attitude can be to a team. If he quit with a few weeks left in the season I would bet he was bitching and complaining way before that. He was good but not that good. Love seeing Egun and Mack play well. Watch their body language on bench even when they aren't playing much. Total team guys. That being said Travis still will have to go out and find him a big body transfer.

Grizfan-24 said:

...I really don't see many players leaving, with maybe the exception of one or two, this is a team that could be 10 deep easily for next year. Easy to get excited about next year when you consider what you have seen out of Beasley, Whitney, Bannan, and others in spurts this year. Egun looked aggressive in his mop up duty last night. The cupboard is hardly bare.

Click to expand...

What makes me excited is that technically, this is a "zero" year. All of these freshman getting significant playing minutes will still be considered "Freshman" next basketball season by the NCAA. Another thing I thought was interesting in the TDC zoom call where he talked about transfers was that with the weirdly structured season plus a HOST of new faces, it is really difficult to put a full game plan in.

The game plan is put in, but because they aren't able to spend as much time on it, the younger players have a more difficult time adjusting a bit on the fly to what the opposing offense is throwing at them. The more experienced teams while maybe a little less "athletically" talented are doing better because they can adjust more quickly than a roster made of Freshman getting big minutes during games.

MissoulaMarinerFan said:

Grizfan-24 said:

...I really don't see many players leaving, with maybe the exception of one or two, this is a team that could be 10 deep easily for next year. Easy to get excited about next year when you consider what you have seen out of Beasley, Whitney, Bannan, and others in spurts this year. Egun looked aggressive in his mop up duty last night. The cupboard is hardly bare.

Click to expand...

What makes me excited is that technically, this is a "zero" year. All of these freshman getting significant playing minutes will still be considered "Freshman" next basketball season by the NCAA. Another thing I thought was interesting in the TDC zoom call where he talked about transfers was that with the weirdly structured season plus a HOST of new faces, it is really difficult to put a full game plan in.

The game plan is put in, but because they aren't able to spend as much time on it, the younger players have a more difficult time adjusting a bit on the fly to what the opposing offense is throwing at them. The more experienced teams while maybe a little less "athletically" talented are doing better because they can adjust more quickly than a roster made of Freshman getting big minutes during games.

Click to expand...

I'm also looking ahead as if it's a glass half full. S**t has rolled down hill since the SUU series after a fairly promising, if abbreviated, preseason. Easy to get spoiled by consistent success, just ask folks in Durham, Ann Arbor and Lexington about now. It's difficult to stay on top, it's where everyone wants to be. The boys can still do some damage in Boise and end the year on a positive run. I'll be watching.