I Can't Stand Cooney...

[Bayside44]

playing all 40 minutes & getting no rest even when he is in the middle of 10 straight misses.

Totally on the Coach.

Does Jimmy really believe that Trevor brings so much to the court when he isn't making shots that he can't be sat down for a couple of minutes to get his legs & settle down ????

Has Jimmy ever heard of taking a step back (if it even is a step back) so that you can take two steps forward ????

Devo was there, he has a year of eligibility left, play him!

Seriously, who is gonna score if he sits.

 

[Ghost]

Devo was there, he has a year of eligibility left, play him!

Seriously, who is gonna score if he sits.

What would be the harm in resting him a 2-4 minutes once in awhile though? Seriously?

I posted this in another thread, here are the scores against power conference teams with Cooney on the bench (Florida State was definitely walk-on time, so not much significance with that one...not sure on a couple others, but Michigan, Pitt, etc...were all in the midst of competitive games):

Michigan: 10-7 w/ Cooney off the floor
St. Johns: 2-2
Georgia Tech: 3-6
Florida State: 0-5
Clemson: 5-2
Pitt: 8-2

I'm seeing a trend...and that trend is NOT that we score zero points every single time.

It's not like we wouldn't be able to inbound the ball. Other people would score. Just like in other games. We're not better with him off the floor, but we might be better if he had a rest once in a bit. I wouldn't argue with people that thought getting Rak a minute or two here or there were out of their minds either. The game didn't fall to pieces during Okobohs minutes yesterday.

What is so terrifying about Cooney sitting to some people? I would wager to guess Christmas or G could still score if they wanted.....even with Cooney, dare I say it, on the bench.

 

[Bayside44]

What would be the harm in resting him a 2-4 minutes once in awhile though? Seriously?

I posted this in another thread, here are the scores against power conference teams with Cooney on the bench (Florida State was definitely walk-on time, so not much significance with that one...not sure on a couple others, but Michigan, Pitt, etc...were all in the midst of competitive games):

Michigan: 10-7 w/ Cooney off the floor
St. Johns: 2-2
Georgia Tech: 3-6
Florida State: 0-5
Clemson: 5-2
Pitt: 8-2

It's like we wouldn't be able to inbound the ball. Other people would score. Just like in other games. We're not better with him off the floor, but we might be better if he had a rest once in a bit. I wouldn't argue with people that thought getting Rak a minute or two here or there were out of their minds either. The game didn't fall to pieces during Okobohs minutes yesterday.

What is so terrifying about Cooney sitting to some people? I would wager to guess Christmas or G could still score if they wanted.

Who would play if he sits. You see BJ get his candy stolen at the top of the key yesterday? We just don't have realistic options, esp in the teeth of the ACC schedule.

 

[tbonezone]

Devo. you might not like his looks.you might not like his swagger. but if i'm at the Ymca picking a team it's devo all day over cooney.

 

[Ghost]

Who would play if he sits. You see BJ get his candy stolen at the top of the key yesterday? We just don't have realistic options, esp in the teeth of the ACC schedule.

I know, I'm not trying to be difficult, but I think it would benefit Cooney.

I think we could in certain instances sneak Joseph over to the SG spot and play G at point (primarily because I think it would help Joseph a ton to play off the ball on occasion). We could go with Patterson and G up top. Johnson and whomever you want. In very limited minutes I don't think we would fall apart.

Obviously, in long stretches I think Obokoh would be disastrous, but I think if Rak needs a minute or two, we can survive the time on the court. We did yesterday.

The numbers even show we can. It's not like we shut down on offense when Cooney sits. We simply DO NOT. The numbers support it.

 

[Bayside44]

I know, I'm not trying to be difficult, but I think it would benefit Cooney.

I think we could in certain instances sneak Joseph over to the SG spot and play G at point. We could go with Patterson and G up top. Johnson. In very limited minutes I don't think we would fall apart. Obviously, in long stretches I think Obokoh would be disastrous, but I think if Rak needs a minute or two, we can survive the time on the court.

The numbers even show we can. It's not like we shut down on offense when Cooney sits. We simply DO NOT. The numbers support it.

In that case BJ's guy and Kaleb's guy are about 14 feet from the hoop at most daring them to shoot. I think we would do the same too if we were the other team.

 

[Ghost]

In that case BJ's guy and Kaleb's guy are about 14 feet from the hoop at most daring them to shoot. I think we would do the same too if we were the other team.

So how did we go 10-7 against Michigan and 8-2 against Pitt? Why do we score when he sits? Who cares - let them do that all they want. To quote DC, whoooop-de-dammmed-doooooo!

Do you really think these kids are that INEPT? That they are truly so inept that they are unable to approach a level of skill that they can spell the amazing Trevor Cooney for even 2 minutes in a half? It makes no sense.

How do you explain that we actually do in fact do okay when he sits against power conference teams? Is god intervening?

 

[Bayside44]

So how did we go 10-7 against Michigan and 8-2 against Pitt? Why do we score when he sits? Who cares - let them do that all they want. To quote DC, whoooop-de-dammmed-doooooo!

Do you really think these kids are that INEPT? That they are truly so inept that they are unable to approach a level of skill that they can spell the amazing Trevor Cooney for even 2 minutes in a half? It makes no sense.

How do you explain that we actually do in fact do okay when he sits against power conference teams? Is god intervening?

Chris McCullough had 10 points in the Michigan game and Michigan isn't very good. Hard to use that as a baseline since one of our big guys isn't playing (and Cooney had a wretched first half and was still acting like a designated shooter).

I don't think a kid like BJ can contribute against a Duke if that's what you're asking. Not his fault, we're 4 guys down from where we though we would be when he got signed.

 

[Ghost]

Chris McCullough had 10 points in the Michigan game and Michigan isn't very good. Hard to use that as a baseline since one of our big guys isn't playing (and Cooney had a wretched first half and was still acting like a designated shooter).

I don't think a kid like BJ can contribute against a Duke if that's what you're asking. Not his fault, we're 4 guys down from where we though we would be when he got signed.

Cooney is like a religion on this board. It's baffling. We can argue all day about everyone, and you can present numbers and people will digest them, and respond, but for Cooney numbers are thrown out, everything is out the window. All that matters is that without Cooney on the floor the end of days may be upon us, and we can't score.

Even if we do score without him (and the numbers back that up).

Increase the sample size. Because from the numbers it sure looks like we don't fall apart to the extent people like to say we will (i.e. - we cannot score w/out Cooney).

I truly believe if I could present statistics that said we outscored opponents 289-3 this year with Cooney on the bench people would just respond with, "but who would score if Cooney sits?"

I'm at a loss.

How did we go 8-2 against Pitt without Cooney in 2 minutes?

 

[two3zone]

Cooney is like a religion on this board. It's baffling. We can argue all day about everyone, and you can present numbers and people will digest them, and respond, but for Cooney numbers are thrown out, everything is out the window. All that matters is that without Cooney on the floor the end of days may be upon us, and we can't score. Even if we do score without him (and the numbers back that up). Increase the sample size. Because from the numbers it sure looks like we don't fall apart to the extent people like to say we will (i.e. - we cannot score w/out Cooney). I truly believe if I could present statistics that said we outscored opponents 289-3 this year with Cooney on the bench people would just respond with, "but who would score if Cooney sits?" I'm at a loss. How did we go 8-2 against Pitt without Cooney in 2 minutes?

I see what you're saying but 2 minutes is hardly a sample size. Play Chinoso for 2 minutes and say G or Cooney hit 3 threes between them and the other team makes a couple of easy layups against him, it would make it us 9 them 4 in two minutes. It doesn't mean that Chin was more valuable during that time frame, in all reality he have up the 4 points and contributed nothing on offense.

It's a small sample size and a point spread in 2 minutes doesn't tell us any story at all on how the personnel did that was on the floor during that time.

 

[Bayside44]

Cooney is like a religion on this board. It's baffling. We can argue all day about everyone, and you can present numbers and people will digest them, and respond, but for Cooney numbers are thrown out, everything is out the window. All that matters is that without Cooney on the floor the end of days may be upon us, and we can't score.

Even if we do score without him (and the numbers back that up).

Increase the sample size. Because from the numbers it sure looks like we don't fall apart to the extent people like to say we will (i.e. - we cannot score w/out Cooney).

I truly believe if I could present statistics that said we outscored opponents 289-3 this year with Cooney on the bench people would just respond with, "but who would score if Cooney sits?"

I'm at a loss.

How did we go 8-2 against Pitt without Cooney in 2 minutes?

Can you show the sequence in the Pitt game? Because the rest of the numbers don't really add up - we got destroyed at Clemson and we don't have McCullough. Personally I am not in the Cooney amen corner - I just think we are massively limited this year and he's the best of a series of troubling options. He's at least shown the potential to get hot and go on a run - and with what we've got (which is a non-tournament team regardless of the NCAA) it's the hand JB believes in the most.

 

[HOFCeluck]

I feel like I read these exact same posts ten years ago...just substitute "Gerry Macnamara*" for Cooney.


* still think he's a legend though.

 

[Ghost]

Can you show the sequence in the Pitt game? Because the rest of the numbers don't really add up - we got destroyed at Clemson and we don't have McCullough. Personally I am not in the Cooney amen corner - I just think we are massively limited this year and he's the best of a series of troubling options. He's at least shown the potential to get hot and go on a run - and with what we've got (which is a non-tournament team regardless of the NCAA) it's the hand JB believes in the most.

It was somewhere around the 12 or 10 minute mark after he picked up his 4th foul. He came out, we went on an 8-2 run, JB brought him back in inexplicably early considering how we were doing. Which is why I question JB's reasoning for going with all 40 night after night. That was the PERFECT situation to get him a couple minutes, 4 fouls, TONS of time left, we were in the midst of an 8-2 run, and up pops Cooney off the bench at the next stoppage in play.

Again, I think we need him out there most of the game too, I genuinely do, I just don't think we need to see him and Christmas laboring at times. Those couple minutes haven't proven to be our undoing when they sit.

At the end of the day we are a defensive team. Our offense isn't winning us games. Patterson and Cooney are interchangeable on defense for the most part, so even if you swap those two out - what's the net loss? Probably not much. If you have a fresher Cooney at the end - maybe that helps the team overall. God knows we seem to fall apart at the end of most games. Poor execution, exhaustion, who knows how much any of it plays into it...but if you can limit one of those things, why not?

Christmas sat, the world didn't end. Cooney can sit and the world doesn't end. The numbers show us this is true (based on a small sample size, but that's all we got).

 

[DoctorBombay]

These same arguments were being said about last years team.
Boeheim plays a short bench. Period.
It sucks, IMO, but as Melo opined: " That's what Boeheim do".

 

[Ghost]

These same arguments were being said about last years team.
Boeheim plays a short bench. Period.
It sucks, IMO, but as Melo opined: " That's what Boeheim do".

DC: "Whoopity-damn-do!"
Melo: "That's what Boeheim do"

Two of my favorite quotes in one thread. Well done, Doctor.

 

[tbonezone]

well i see the SU classic dunk thread below. and i believe i can guess that when the SU classic airball thread rolls around ...

 

[Bayside44]

It was around the 10 minute mark after he picked up his 4th foul. He came out, we went on an 8-2 run, JB brought him back in inexplicably early considering how we were doing.

Again, I think we need him out there most of the game too, I just don't think we need to see him and Christmas laboring at times. Those couple minutes haven't proven to be our undoing when they sit.

At the end of the day we are a defensive team. Our offense isn't winning us game. Patterson and Cooney are interchangeable on defense for the most part, so even if you swap those two out - what's the net loss? Probably not much. If you have a fresher Cooney at the end - maybe that helps the team overall. God knows we seem to fall apart at the end of most games. Poor execution, exhaustion, who knows how much any of it plays into it...but if you can limit one of those things, why not?

Christmas sat, the world end. Cooney can sit and the world doesn't end. The numbers show us this is true.

But the numbers that you posted don't really show anything other than a minor plus 6 at Pitt. We need these Herculian efforts of scoring (Cooney at UNC, G last night) in these games to get us up at the half. Hard to sit a shooter for a non-shooter.

Cooney gets his steals and leaves his man a lot on D - I can agree on that front.

We're not a heck of a defensive team this year either...with our lack of depth teams can take it to us daring us to foul. We almost do have to outscore to win em.

This is just a tough year to take.

 

[kcsu]

Trevor seems to be the coaches pet. At this point it makes zero sense to not give him a break a few times a game. G can play the 2. Not sure but there is no reason at all for him to be playing the entire game especially when he is off.

 

[Ghost]

But the numbers that you posted don't really show anything other than a minor plus 6 at Pitt. We need these Herculian efforts of scoring (Cooney at UNC, G last night) in these games to get us up at the half. Hard to sit a shooter for a non-shooter.

Cooney gets his steals and leaves his man a lot on D - I can agree on that front.

We're not a heck of a defensive team this year either...with our lack of depth teams can take it to us daring us to foul. We almost do have to outscore to win em.

This is just a tough year to take.

Do we? We don't know that at all. We just have people say that he can't sit for a few minutes a game because......well, for no reason at all. And the only numbers we have, albeit small, do not back that up at all.

Against Clemson we were 5-2 w/out Cooney on the floor. So in the last two games he sat we were 13-4 in four minutes of Cooney off the floor.

I'm just at a loss as to how that shows that we cannot score without Cooney playing for a couple minutes here or there to hopefully have him fresher at the end of a game or half or whatever.

 

[jekelish]

I can't stand when I go to the beach and sand gets in my shoes.

 

[Bayside44]

Do we? We don't know that at all. We just have people say that he can't sit for a few minutes a game because...well, for no reason at all. And the only numbers we have, albeit small, do not back that up at all.

Against Clemson we were 5-2 w/out Cooney on the floor. So in the last two games he sat we were 13-4 in four minutes of Cooney off the floor.

I'm just at a loss as to how that shows that we cannot score without Cooney playing for a couple minutes here or there to hopefully have him fresher at the end of a game or half or whatever.

We got destroyed at Clemson and heck we lost at Pitt. Without the sequence that really doesn't tell you anything and the sample size is tiny.

People think he shouldn't sit (including the coaches) because the other options are worse. I don't love it either but it's what happens when 2 guys get hurt and 2 guys go off to live their dream before the program could've imagined it possible.

 

[Ghost]

We got destroyed at Clemson and heck we lost at Pitt. Without the sequence that really doesn't tell you anything and the sample size is tiny.

People think he shouldn't sit (including the coaches) because the other options are worse. I don't love it either but it's what happens when 2 guys get hurt and 2 guys go off to live their dream before the program could've imagined it possible.

Right. We did lose both games. Not too sure how that impacts my point.

We also did better with Cooney on the bench - which isn't at all the point of my post. I could care less about that. My point is - we scored 13 points in the four minutes that Trevor was on the bench. Of course the sample size is tiny, that's kind of my point.

Everyone just keeps saying, hey, we can't score if Cooney sits! It's literally impossible!

Except we do score when Cooney sits.

But even when do, the sample size is so small that it means nothing so, inexplicably, the fact remains, we can't score if Cooney sits.

It's the most illogical reasoning I have ever seen.

Of course the options on the bench are worse. That's why Cooney starts.

 

[Bayside44]

Right. We did lose both games. Not too sure how that impacts my point.

We also did better with Cooney on the bench - which isn't at all the point of my post. I could care less about that. My point is - we scored 13 points in the four minutes that Trevor was on the bench. Of course the sample size is tiny, that's kind of my point.

Everyone just keeps saying, hey, we can't score if Cooney sits! It's literally impossible!

Except we do score when Cooney sits.

But even when do, the sample size is so small that it means nothing so, inexplicably, the fact remains, we can't score if Cooney sits.

It's the most illogical reasoning I have ever seen.

Of course the options on the bench are worse. That's why Cooney starts.

If you sit Cooney your options are:

Kaleb and Buss, G at the 3
G and Kaleb / Buss and BJ at the 3

We're not that good, doing either generally makes us worse on the floor - which we can afford in some games but against that Duke team yesterday we couldn't.

 

[Eagles20]

When he called the timeout..he yelled at joseph because he didn't get back on defense the play before. He wasn't flipping about the current play. You could read his lips.

 

[Ghost]

If you sit Cooney your options are:

Kaleb and Buss, G at the 3
G and Kaleb / Buss and BJ at the 3

We're not that good, doing either generally makes us worse on the floor - which we can afford in some games but against that Duke team yesterday we couldn't.

Oh, we might be arguing different things. lol

I'm arguing in general - not yesterday specifically. Although I would think we could afford to even against Duke.

I'm fine with those options for limited minutes fwiw.

Like I said, we could take Rak out yesterday without the wheels coming off, I would think we could do the same with Cooney. That isn't to say there wouldn't be games where we go down a quick six because Cooney sits, but there will be games like Pitt where we go on a quick 8-2 run as well. Sometimes it's just how the ball bounces.