Let me first state I am no lover of Gordon Monson. I have said before he often sounds like he talks with marbles in his mouth. He most assuredly is a troll at times and writes just for the sake of stirring people up. However I feel this is not the case with his latest column about Dave Rose. I think the piece is measured, fair and has an accurate pulse of what is going on in BYU basketball currently.
Monson is right, we have become proficient at "good" but are actually quite a ways from being great. I think this is the first year I would really hold Dave Rose accountable for that. Certainly there are factors coaches can not affect. He can not heal Davies or Bryant. He cant overcome horrific reffing in the Valpo game and cant make his sophomores as sage as seniors. But there are things a coach can mitigate and there are recurring themes with Rose coached teams that are more than troublesome.
1. Defense- Does anyone really believe we do not have the athletes to defend better than we have over the last few years?
(and by better I mean much better)
2. Shot Selection- Does anyone believe that other than Jimmer himself shooting a 25-30 footer early in the shot clock is a good shot?
(by the way Jimmer didn't even start shooting those till his Jr. year)
3. Substitution patterns along with sitting key players in foul trouble.
This is a philosophical difference I have with coach. I believe in certain big games he needs to gamble more with Mika or others to try for the win.
( I know, I know, a gambler saying Rose needs to gamble more )
I am not advocating Rose becoming the new Bobby Knight but maybe some accountability for these young guys would be nice. When I look at St. Marys I see teams of BYU past. I see a lot of white guys who probably wouldn't start for anyone else who frustrate you with ball movement, discipline and adequate defense. I think fans frustrations stem from the fact that they are beating us at our own "old" game. To compound that frustration it would now seem we actually HAVE these better athletes to compete with in our program.
I saw a post earlier today differentiating Roger Reid's accomplishments from Coach Rose's. Lets remember when comparing that 20 wins back then is now basically equivalent to 24 wins now because we play more games. I think it could also be argued that Reid might have made a sweet 16 with Bradley staying 4 years. To me , the only difference between Rose and Reid is Jimmer and some discretion in communication. Rose has 4 NCAA tourny wins but in my mind I would say 2 legit. Gonzaga, who we were seeded higher than anyway and Florida. That's.... not that great.
So Is Rose .... Bronco? Unfortunately or fortunately I would say ... Yes. We basically win the games we are supposed to and lose the ones we should. The question is.... Is that a bad thing?
I'm not really sure. This is not a post for a new coach. As I posted a few weeks ago, I like Rose, I think he is a great recruiter and an even better person. Maybe this post is about weather or not coaching acumen really does affect wins and losses that much . Ben Criddle said it really well earlier today on his program. A team needs 2 NBA guys to make a decent run. As of right now, I wouldn't say we have that.