re: Wade is just a recruiter

quote:

---

Him not playing basketball hurts because there are a lot of intricacies of the game you can pass on to your players that allow them to gain an edge over your opponent. X’s and O’s wise, he lacks, especially in the defensive category. Offensively, people give him a pass because they score well and have good offensive efficiency numbers but against athletic, defensively minded teams, they struggle with a one on one approach on offense.

---

Bruce Pearl didn't play college basketball. I'd say he's done pretty well. Scott Drew didn't play...his team is currently undefeated and ranked #2. Roy Williams played 2 years on the UNC J.V. team...he's won 3 championships. and been to 9 Final Fours. Point being, you don't HAVE to play to be a great coach (though most have)

LSU has been fine against good defensive teams for the most part in Wade's career. Where they struggle is when they can't outscore good offensive teams. They've played 3 top 50 offensive teams this year. In those games they allowed an average of 91 ppg and 54% shooting. You simply aren't going to win a lot of games allowing your opponent to shoot 54%. Hell, LSU shot 54%, scored 81 points on the road at St. Louis and LOST...because they couldn't stop SLU from scoring. Last year they went to VCU...in one of the most hostile environments LSU has played in a while...shot 52%, scored 82 (against one of the best defensive teams in the A-10) and LOST...because they allowed VCU to score 50 in the first half.

Simply put, while they have had a poor game here or there, LSU's offense is MORE than good enough to win just about every night. Wade's, not the team, but WADE'S flat out refusal to acknowledge that HIS approach on defense is inadequate is the only thing holding them back from potentially being a championship contender. He's a really good coach. But one with a flaw he's been unwilling to recognize. LSU might have a good defensive game here and there...but those have been the exception in Wade's tenure. Not the rule. At this point it has to be a matter of hubris on his part in that he is going to show everyone he's right despite the fact 4 years of data say otherwise.