Essentially played without a PG this year

[Millhouse]

Several?

Tyus, Frank, Buddy and Elijah can shoot.

Oshae had a rough year again with his jumpshot. Marek still tends to pass up open looks and Buddy often didnt play in the same line as Frank.

I agree, transition would’ve helped. Frank’s slow and limited the possibility of transition. I wish we had a quicker point guard as well.

The only point i’ll defend Frank on is we did not have an offense, or pieces, that’d help rack up assists. No ones cutting, no ones rolling. We passed the ball a couple times, pounded the rock around and often just looked for the bail out 3. Thank god for Buddy and Elijah this year.

battle can score but he is a below average shooter

 

[MikeSU02]

Point guard is the straw that stirs the drink. Keep that in mind, then go back and re-read that incredibly detailed and informative post.

The offense sucked for many reasons, but one in particular.

No offense, the #1 reason our offense stunk was the coach.

Assists take two people to occur.

I am NOT a Frank Howard fanboy, but the fact that the offensive woes aren't viewed as a systemic issue versus nailing it to Frank is pretty startling.

 

[Trueblue25]

33% poor point guard play
33% no post threat
33% 0 offensive identity, hero ball.

1% poor fan participation (Completely kidding)

Simplified version of what I think.

 

[Millhouse]

Having 3 or more players who can shoot = several.

A true point guard flanked by Hughes / Buddy -- who were good three point shooters -- and a guy like Battle who could also make shots, would have "several" shooters around him in a lineup of 5 players. Isn't that the ideal lineup -- a point guard, a post threat, and three shooters?




This is a chicken v. egg argument, IMO. The offense has turned into this because we've lacked a point guard to run our half-court offensive sets. Hence, the iso. Iso would be unnecessary if we had a guy who could initiate the offense, penetrate every once in awhile, set guys up off of the bounce, or push the ball to get us in position to score before the defense gets set.

there's an old cliche you want good fast and cheap but you have to pick 2

well, here we can have ball handling, length, and shooting but you have to pick 2

sims 2 (shooting), hart 2 (shooting - got better though), mcnamara 2 (length), edelin 2 (shooting), flynn (length), mcw 2 (shooting), gbinije (ball handling) was probably the closest to 3 but his ball handling wasn't quite there

other schools have the same problem but put less priority on length. jardine was close to being pretty good in all three areas, probably the most underrated player we've ever had, didn't excel at any one thing but got by in all three

 

[Millhouse]

33% poor point guard play
33% no post threat
33% 0 offensive identity, hero ball.

1% poor fan participation (Completely kidding)

Simplified version of what I think.

how many teams have a post threat really?

 

[RF2044]

No offense, the #1 reason our offense stunk was the coach.

Assists take two people to occur.

I am NOT a Frank Howard fanboy, but the fact that the offensive woes aren't viewed as a systemic issue versus nailing it to Frank is pretty startling.

No offense, but please don't mischaracterize my position. The offense has turned into an abomination precisely because we've spent several years playing without a true lead guard, and this is what results when you have to compensate for not having someone out there who can orchestrate an effective offensive attack.

Boeheim deserves blame for recruiting length for the zone over skill at the point, and also for electing to pass on several players over the past few years who would have nailed down the point guard position and made it an area of strength instead of a massive weakness.

re: taking two to score -- that's a substantial overstatement, given that we had four players [not including Frank] who were capable of being double figure scores any given night. The ingredients were there for this group to be better than they were, save for one: lead guard. A true point guard would have had no problem wracking up assists with that collection of players surrounding him.

 

[RF2044]

there's an old cliche you want good fast and cheap but you have to pick 2

well, here we can have ball handling, length, and shooting but you have to pick 2

sims 2 (shooting), hart 2 (shooting - got better though), mcnamara 2 (length), edelin 2 (shooting), flynn (length), mcw 2 (shooting), gbinije (ball handling) was probably the closest to 3 but his ball handling wasn't quite there

other schools have the same problem but put less priority on length. jardine was close to being pretty good in all three areas, probably the most underrated player we've ever had, didn't excel at any one thing but got by in all three

Solid analogy. And I've stated this repeatedly in other threads, the one position we shouldn't sacrifice length for skill is PG.

I'm good with JB recruiting rangy athletes at every other position for the zone -- but put a lead guard out there to run the show, and then unleash those athletes.

 

[RF2044]

how many teams have a post threat really?

Lots. "Post threat" doesn't mean old school center -- it just means someone who can score consistently in the paint. On the 2003 squad, that was Carmelo Anthony -- our SF.

On this team, it should be Brissett. But he can't finish.

 

[Millhouse]

Lots. "Post threat" doesn't mean old school center -- it just means someone who can score consistently in the paint. On the 2003 squad, that was Carmelo Anthony -- our SF.

On this team, it should be Brissett. But he can't finish.

there are lots of brissetts out there. guys that should score consistently in the paint but don't.

 

[MikeSU02]

No offense, but please don't mischaracterize my position. The offense has turned into an abomination precisely because we've spent several years playing without a true lead guard, and this is what results when you have to compensate for not having someone out there who can orchestrate an effective offensive attack.

Boeheim deserves blame for recruiting length for the zone over skill at the point, and also for electing to pass on several players over the past few years who would have nailed down the point guard position and made it an area of strength instead of a massive weakness.

re: taking two to score -- that's a substantial overstatement, given that we had four players [not including Frank] who were capable of being double figure scores any given night. The ingredients were there for this group to be better than they were, save for one: lead guard.

We could have had Ennis running the offense, but ball screens at 22 feet out with PC aren't going to change the results.

The offense isn't an abomination because of the personnel (although it's part of it)l, it's the strategy. You really think we couldn't have given these players to another coach and the O could have been better?

Everyone thinks this group should have been better, which is crazy to me. This was a team that couldn't score at all last year, had a run in the tourney and then all of a sudden was supposed to be able to get buckets because of what? Elijah Hughes?

An injured Frank having to run the show with a ball dominant 2G, a transfer, OB and PC seems crazy to me to nail Frank on this.

 

[Millhouse]

Solid analogy. And I've stated this repeatedly in other threads, the one position we shouldn't sacrifice length for skill is PG.

I'm good with JB recruiting rangy athletes at every other position for the zone -- but put a lead guard out there to run the show, and then unleash those athletes.

it's hard to believe that the defense was so bad for the gillon white year. 16-17 is a year that i just don't understand. if their defense was just ok, they could've had a great year.

 

[RF2044]

We could have had Ennis running the offense, but ball screens at 22 feet out with PC aren't going to change the results.

The offense isn't an abomination because of the personnel (although it's part of it)l, it's the strategy. You really think we couldn't have given these players to another coach and the O could have been better?

Everyone thinks this group should have been better, which is crazy to me. This was a team that couldn't score at all last year, had a run in the tourney and then all of a sudden was supposed to be able to get buckets because of what? Elijah Hughes?

An injured Frank having to run the show with a ball dominant 2G, a transfer, OB and PC seems crazy to me to nail Frank on this.

I see -- so , I suggest that if we turned this group over to a new point guard we'd get better results and you argue with that, but then suggest that if you turned the group over to a new coach that it would be better?

I think that in the rush to absolve Frank's abysmal play, people aren't seeing the forest through the trees.
I also don't think that there is one silver bullet root cause -- it isn't all about Frank, but that was a major factor.

Mike, the same thing I said to trueblue applies to this line of thinking. Chicken vs. egg on the strategy. The strategy sucks, but is necessary because the team lacked a point guard. We SHOULD have had one, but we didn't, which necessitated the strategy.

You single out Ennis -- the truth about Ennis is that his preternatural skill was avoiding mistakes. Loved the kid when he was here, but his tenure marked the beginning of the transformation from what we had before offensively into the current approach because he didn't take chances and was risk avoidant. He also quarterbacked a team that lacked virtually any scoring pop, compared to the previous team that had an embarrassment of riches. We had Fair, we had Ennis himself, and we had inconsistent Gbinije and Cooney. So we slowed it down and played iso.

Also, I don't understand why everybody compares our personnel this year to last year's team. We had two key additions -- both of whom could really shoot the ball; it WASN'T the same group of players as the previous year. Incumbents Battle and Brissett can score. What they lacked was a guy who could take disparate parts and make the island of mismatched toys into something a little more effective than the individual parts. Instead of Ennis, put someone who played a bit riskier like Scoop, or even Griffin, or MCW at the helm -- do you honestly not think that they would have fielded a more cohesive offensive unit?

 

[RF2044]

it's hard to believe that the defense was so bad for the gillon white year. 16-17 is a year that i just don't understand. if their defense was just ok, they could've had a great year.

That team still makes my head hurt...

We had basically the worst preseason in program history, then made lineup changes and righted the ship. The slippage that year defensively was absurd -- if they'd been even just below average, they win several more games and coast to the NCAAs.

When you compare our historical defensive stats, that year is such an outlier, it almost has to be written off as an outlier. Ugh...

 

[OttoinGrotto]

jardine was close to being pretty good in all three areas, probably the most underrated player we've ever had, didn't excel at any one thing but got by in all three

That's a big statement coming from you, as I recall Scoop often drove you nuts. At least when he was relied on for big minutes.

 

[sdorange]

IMO, this all begins and ends with the inability to recruit a true pg. Someone who can get in the lane to shoot or draw defenders, or break a defense late in the clock. Blame for sure on JB for whiffing on the recruiting trial or trying to turn FH into a pg for sake of zone length.

That said, also think JB's Olympic experience w NBA coaches who have the talent for ISO offense doesn't serve college players well unless you have at least 3 studs and a capable pg.

I think running a free flowing screen and move offense with some back door options, and having the ability to rebound and outlet to a break for easy buckets would be a refreshing change. Don't like UNC, but Colby White, and their past pg's make offense look easy

 

[OttoinGrotto]

We could have had Ennis running the offense, but ball screens at 22 feet out with PC aren't going to change the results.

The offense isn't an abomination because of the personnel (although it's part of it)l, it's the strategy. You really think we couldn't have given these players to another coach and the O could have been better?

Everyone thinks this group should have been better, which is crazy to me. This was a team that couldn't score at all last year, had a run in the tourney and then all of a sudden was supposed to be able to get buckets because of what? Elijah Hughes?

An injured Frank having to run the show with a ball dominant 2G, a transfer, OB and PC seems crazy to me to nail Frank on this.

My optimism was due to thinking that Brissett, Frankie, Battle and Marek would all improve, that Hughes would add something, and Carey would also help. I wasn't counting on much of a change from the 5.

Instead, Brissett was pretty much the same guy but got to the line less and didn't shoot as well from 3, Frankie was injured and that clearly affected not just his performance but how he even played the game, Battle improved in some ways but didn't take the leap we thought, and Marek got better but was still used in a limited role. Hughes did add something, Carey didn't really help, but Buddy came on. We didn't have much change at the 5.

Edit to add: Had Frankie not gotten injured, I think we would have taken some big steps forward.

 

[Millhouse]

That's a big statement coming from you, as I recall Scoop often drove you nuts. At least when he was relied on for big minutes.

oh when he went into I GOT THIS mode, it always went to schlitt

 

[Trueblue25]

I cannot wait for Goodine though. Hopefully he’s good enough to allow Girard to develop at the 2

 

[OttoinGrotto]

oh when he went into I GOT THIS mode, it always went to schlitt

I feel like we could have benefited from a little I GOT THIS this season.

 

[Brooky03]

Yes. Put Scoop -- who was a fairly "average" point guard relative to some of the great players we've had -- on last year's team, and the offensive output would have been substantially better. Because he could actually do point guard things that Frank couldn't do.

Kid was injured. Tough break, not piling on. But the data above speaks for itself. The total didn't add up to the sum of the individual parts, because the team lacked a point guard.

It's a chicken or egg argument.

Oshae Brissett is not a good Forward. Battle was an inefficient volume shooter who stopped ball movement. Hughes was a shooter and nothing else. The Centers struggled to just catch the ball and dunk.

Put Scoop on this team and he averages 4apg if he's lucky. The team would be better cuz he was a more efficient scorer.

Frank deserves criticism. Putting the team's failure on him, mostly or entirely, is dumb.

 

[Millhouse]

I feel like we could have benefited from a little I GOT THIS this season.

barf we saw it plenty from brissett and battle. hughes goes off in the first half when the ball moves, then goes away when brissett tries to dribble or when battle decides to shoot 2.9 point shots

 

[RF2044]

It's a chicken or egg argument.

Oshae Brissett is not a good Forward. Battle was an inefficient volume shooter who stopped ball movement. Hughes was a shooter and nothing else. The Centers struggled to just catch the ball and dunk.

Put Scoop on this team and he averages 4apg if he's lucky. The team would be better cuz he was a more efficient scorer.

Frank deserves criticism. Putting the team's failure on him, mostly or entirely, is dumb.

What's dumb is pulling numbers out of your posterior, and then presenting them as fact -- which is the opposite of the OP.

Frank deserves criticism -- on that we certainly agree. The team's failure is not having a point guard. Perhaps in your rush to defend Frank, you are reading more into what's being discussed than is being implied [certainly by me]. But, the data provided in the OP is objective. It isn't interpretive.

 

[Brooky03]

What's dumb is pulling numbers out of your posterior, and then presenting them as fact -- which is the opposite of the OP.

Frank deserves criticism -- on that we certainly agree. The team's failure is not having a point guard. Perhaps in your rush to defend Frank, you are reading more into what's being discussed than is being implied [certainly by me]. But, the data provided in the OP is objective. It isn't interpretive.

Assists are a dependant variable. Other stats, like rebounds, are independent. For example, a rebounder will rebound well regardless of the talent around him. Assists don't work like that.

He didn't score well. If we want to shred him for that, fine, cool. He also didn't pass to guys - who weren't open or trying to get open - and make the shot for them. Should I post the rest of the trash stats from our other players? Hint: you don't want that.

 

[RF2044]

Assists are a dependant variable. Other stats, like rebounds, are independent. For example, a rebounder will rebound well regardless of the talent around him. Assists don't work like that.

He didn't score well. If we want to shred him for that, fine, cool. He also didn't pass to guys - who weren't open or trying to get open - and make the shot for them. Should I post the rest of the trash stats from our other players? Hint: you don't want that.

Luckily, the OP presented a lot more data than just assists. You apparently overlooked it all in your zeal to defend Frank.

By almost no objective or subjective measure can it be argued that Frank had a good season. And yet, you continue to argue and rationalize that very claim.

He was injured; that adversely impacted his performance. A better point guard would have improved those trash stats, because good lead guards make their teammates better.

Having good players around you can also make a PG more effective. GMac 2003 was a great example of this. These two things aren't mutually exclusive. As stated above, there isn't one magic bullet root cause -- there are a number of reasons why the offense was poor, but subpar PG play was one of the main ones.

If it makes you feel better about Frank not being singled out, feel free to lump Carey in there for his ineffectual play, as well.

 

[FireballPhil]

Since Baylor game I've been trying to figure out where this season went wrong for SU. I had high expectations, coming off of a Sweet 16 finish & getting everyone back (plus Hughes & decent recruits).

Popular narrative around here lately has been how SU has not recruited PG & Centers well recently. So, I wanted to give that a little test - or, at least the PG part. My eyes told me it was true...that Frank Howard was not preforming well at all this season, and our offense was suffering because of it. But do the stats show this as well?

Because, on paper, PG should have been a solid position for SU in 2018-19. A returning Senior PG who had played well prior year! Talented new top 50 recruit! Well, that didn't turn out to be the case. Check it out. (Note: All stats are for games not including the NCAA Tournament.)

Frank Howard vs the Field (each team's leading assist player for every team in NCAA Tournament):

What stats do we want to focus on for a PG? Well, how about assists? That is essentially their main role - to facilitate offense & get players easy shots. Here's how Frank Howard compared:


Assists per Game:

Howard - 2.9 APG (Rank - #58th best)

NCAA Highest - 7.6 APG (C. Winston, Mich St)
NCAA Lowest - 2.5 APG (R. Duncan, Vermont)
How many better than Howard - 58 players out of 64.

Total Assists (Season):

Howard - 84 Assists (Rank - Tied for #64th best)

NCAA Highest - 311 Assists (J. Morant, Murray St)
NCAA Lowest - 84 Assists (F. Howard, SU & E. Worku, UC Irvine)
How many better than Howard - All, or 63 players of 64.

Ok, so that's not good (lol). How about Assist to Turnover ratio?

Assist to Turnover Ratio:

Howard - 1.42% (Rank - #50th best)

NCAA Highest - 3.56% (C. Winston, Mich St.)
NCAA Lowest - 1.00% (M. Howard, Marquette & D. Simonds, Georgia St.)
How many better than Howard - 50 players of 64.

Well, if a PG is not the "pass first" type, then he very well may be a scorer. How about shooting percentages?

FG %:

Howard - 365% (Rank - #65th best)

NCAA Highest - 555% (J. Tate, Northern Kentucky)
NCAA Lowest - 365% (F. Howard, SU)
How many better than Howard - ALL 64 of 64 players.
In fact, only 11 other players were below 400% FG. Next closest to FH was 374%.

3PT %:

Howard - 340% (Rank - #40th best)

NCAA Highest - 485% (S. Murphy, Woffard)
NCAA Lowest - 176% (R. Duncan, Vermont)
How many better than Howard - 39 players out of 64.

So...shooting wasn't exactly Frank's strong suit either. How about driving the lane, breaking down the defense? At the very least a PG could be causing havoc for the opposing defense by getting fouled and getting to the FT line. Or, FTAs are also indications the PG is driving and possibly dishing as well.

Free Throw Attempts per Game:

Howard - 1.4 FTA (Rank - #57th best)

NCAA Highest - 8.3 FTA (M. Howard, Marquette)
NCAA Lowest - 0.7 FTA (J. Bieniemy, Oklahoma)
How many better than Howard - 56 players out of 64.

I'm not prone to hyperbole - BUT, if I were, I would say "Syracuse LITERALLY played without a point guard this past season! OMFG!" Haha.

But, wow, look at some of these stats...they seem to back up "the eye test" to confirm that our Senior PG leader was not very good at all this year. (Sorry to pile on, FH - wish the stats could have exonerated you.)

One aspect that can absolutely (and should) get better in 2019-2020.

So he missed how many games this year due to injury and still finished this good? Imagine if he had played every game like these other guys, he would have been easily in the top 50% all year!