RIP to the RPI

[AlaskaSU]

From a homeboy perspective, JB is known as Mr. November for good reason. We also tend to fade at the end, perhaps due to weariness and a limited bench. Equal weighting is generally to our advantage.

 

[Orangezoo]

I’m not really remembering getting boned with seeds. In those starts I think we loaded up on cupcakes then started a tailspin against good teams. Short BET as well? Boeheim has changed his tune with scheduling the past few years for the better.

This thread is really difficult to evaluate. UVA and Sparty come to mind. I’m not sure how much better we were in March. I mean TCU shot 39% and 17% from 3. They shouldn’t have even been in the game. Our defense was good but it’s a ‘gimmick’ D unfamiliar to many teams in the Tourney especially on short notice. Our offense was what it was...terrible. We were very lucky to advance. These games just should not have been that close when those teams are turning it over like they were, shooting in the 30s from the field, and in the teens from 3. I mean Sparty shot 26%(!!) for the GAME and had 14 turnovers yet it was a one possession game, lol. We weren’t a good team.

We were elite defensively and just as bad on offense.

 

[SoBeCuse]

We were elite defensively and just as bad on offense.

Right. So we were an ‘average.’ team. Still don’t think we were good overall.

 

[longtimefan]

I’m not really remembering getting boned with seeds. In those starts I think we loaded up on cupcakes then started a tailspin against good teams. Short BET as well? Boeheim has changed his tune with scheduling the past few years for the better.

This thread is really difficult to evaluate. UVA and Sparty come to mind. I’m not sure how much better we were in March. I mean TCU shot 39% and 17% from 3. They shouldn’t have even been in the game. Our defense was good but it’s a ‘gimmick’ D unfamiliar to many teams in the Tourney especially on short notice. Our offense was what it was...terrible. We were very lucky to advance. These games just should not have been that close when those teams are turning it over like they were, shooting in the 30s from the field, and in the teens from 3. I mean Sparty shot 26%(!!) for the GAME and had 14 turnovers yet it was a one possession game, lol. We weren’t a good team.

"Gimmick"? Hardly.

Not only are there lots of teams using the zone now, but over the history of the game, many memorable teams have won with it.

 

[moqui]

From a homeboy perspective, JB is known as Mr. November for good reason. We also tend to fade at the end, perhaps due to weariness and a limited bench. Equal weighting is generally to our advantage.

"mr november" is 15-5 in his last 5 ncaa tournaments

 

[SoBeCuse]

"Gimmick"? Hardly.

Not only are there lots of teams using the zone now, but over the history of the game, many memorable teams have won with it.

Gimmick of course when we get into the Tourney and get a draw that favors us in terms of opponents who barely ever see zone. Not a bad thing at all but it would be a fallacy to think that it doesn’t benefit us especially on short notice or that it isn’t an advantage in our favor.

 

[moqui]

more on "mr. november"
most ncaa tournament wins since 2000 (from gasaway's 2014 list, which i updated to include the 2015-18 tournaments)
1. Kansas 49
2 (tie) UNC 44
Duke 44
4 (tie) Kentucky 42
Michigan St. 42
6. Florida 37
7. Wisconsin 34
8. Uconn 33
9. Syracuse 31
10. Arizona 30

Coming right behind them are Louisville at 28, who we've passed with our recent success and their recent fall, and Villanova at 27, who was sitting in 22nd place with 13 wins following the 2014 tournament, but has added 14 including 2 national titles in the last 4 years. In Gasaway's 2014 tally, we were tied with UCLA at 24; they now have 26.

 

[cuseinseattle]

I don't agree with that. A game in March is a much more reliable indicator of who you are as a team.

I'm going to reserve my judgement on a year to year basis predicated on whether Syracuse has more impressive wins in November or March.

 

[Orangezoo]

Gimmick of course when we get into the Tourney and get a draw that favors us in terms of opponents who barely ever see zone. Not a bad thing at all but it would be a fallacy to think that it doesn’t benefit us especially on short notice or that it isn’t an advantage in our favor.

With that said we still almost beat Duke who has had plenty of chances playing against it and has their own version of it. For me the Duke game said more about where we were at the end of the season given we were a couple of possessions going differently from knocking off the team with multiple first rounders.

 

[Eric15]

more on "mr. november"
most ncaa tournament wins since 2000 (from gasaway's 2014 list, which i updated to include the 2015-18 tournaments)
1. Kansas 49
2 (tie) UNC 44
Duke 44
4 (tie) Kentucky 42
Michigan St. 42
6. Florida 37
7. Wisconsin 34
8. Uconn 33
9. Syracuse 31
10. Arizona 30

A couple quick one-off thoughts...
-Kansas cashes in very few titles for all it's tourney success.
-Wisconsin is greatly under-appreciated as a basketball program.

 

[AlaskaSU]

"mr november" is 15-5 in his last 5 ncaa tournaments

my comment regarding fading at the end was aimed at the end of the regular season. We all know that we have been getting redemption at the dance. Implying that my reference to end of season fade applies to the Dance, is equivalent to jousting at windmills. The discussion at hand is about how the new rating system will effect seeding. Thus, the fading at the end does not refer to post-season. Sorry for the rant, it is just that I don't cotton to the mis-use of strawmen for the sake of argument.

 

[Toga]

 

[SoBeCuse]

A couple quick one-off thoughts...
-Kansas cashes in very few titles for all it's tourney success.
-Wisconsin is greatly under-appreciated as a basketball program.

Yep. My take as well. Wisconsin has been LEGIT for awhile now. Was not surprised when they took out Villanova two years ago in the Tourney. Similar scrappy team to combat Nova. That was the team who embarrassed us in Madison I think.

 

[longtimefan]

Gimmick of course when we get into the Tourney and get a draw that favors us in terms of opponents who barely ever see zone. Not a bad thing at all but it would be a fallacy to think that it doesn’t benefit us especially on short notice or that it isn’t an advantage in our favor.

"Benefit" or "advantage"--probably. That's not the same as gimmick.

 

[SoBeCuse]

"Benefit" or "advantage"--probably. That's not the same as gimmick.

I think they can all be tied together. I mean the defense is still barely used in college ball even though it is deployed a bit more than in the past. Duke as a desperate measure. It’s a weapon but it can still be a gimmick. We can agree to disagree. It’s fine.

 

[Briancuse]

I don't agree with that. A game in March is a much more reliable indicator of who you are as a team.

Then why bother playing those games? If you go out and challenge yourself early and beat kansas you should get credit for that.

 

[dasher]

Then why bother playing those games? If you go out and challenge yourself early and beat kansas you should get credit for that.

Did I say you shouldn't? No. I said I value games at the end of a season a bit more because that is who you are right now.

 

[DBCooper]

I think they can all be tied together. I mean the defense is still barely used in college ball even though it is deployed a bit more than in the past. Duke as a desperate measure. It’s a weapon but it can still be a gimmick. We can agree to disagree. It’s fine.

After 40 plus years it is simply not reasonable to call JB's zone a gimmick. Its part of the Syracuse identity.

 

[SoBeCuse]

After 40 plus years it is simply not reasonable to call JB's zone a gimmick. Its part of the Syracuse identity.

Well of course it’s part of the identity but...

 

[JoeySimz]

I’m not really remembering getting boned with seeds. In those starts I think we loaded up on cupcakes then started a tailspin against good teams. Short BET as well? Boeheim has changed his tune with scheduling the past few years for the better.

This thread is really difficult to evaluate. UVA and Sparty come to mind. I’m not sure how much better we were in March. I mean TCU shot 39% and 17% from 3. They shouldn’t have even been in the game. Our defense was good but it’s a ‘gimmick’ D unfamiliar to many teams in the Tourney especially on short notice. Our offense was what it was...terrible. We were very lucky to advance. These games just should not have been that close when those teams are turning it over like they were, shooting in the 30s from the field, and in the teens from 3. I mean Sparty shot 26%(!!) for the GAME and had 14 turnovers yet it was a one possession game, lol. We weren’t a good team.

You call our defense a “gimmick” and then list examples of it’s effectiveness. Lol.

Our team definitely improved, despite injuries and virtually no bench. We were overwhelmed by Duke in the regular season and only lost by four in the tourney.
Beat sparty too. Two teams many picked to be national champion. That is after strangling two of the highest powered offenses in the nation in TCU and ASU (to the lowest totals iirc) That was not a gimmick. It was intentional and it was smart coaching, that despite our relative offensive ineptitude we were able to impose pace, force turnovers, and low percentage shots on superior scoring teams.

And this year with 3+ gifted offensive players joining the team along with a healthy Sidibe, we could be pretty good on both ends.

 

[MSOrange]

After 40 plus years it is simply not reasonable to call JB's zone a gimmick. Its part of the Syracuse identity.

I get your general point but we haven't always been an exclusive zone team under JB

 

[DBCooper]

I get your general point but we haven't always been an exclusive zone team under JB

Obviously, I am aware of that. That doesn't change my specific point, that JBs zone is not a gimmick. Calling, for example, the Syracuse zone, Jon Chaney's old Temple zone or Rick Pitino's matchup zone a "gimmick" shows a lack of understanding what the word gimmick means.

 

[SoBeCuse]

You call our defense a “gimmick” and then list examples of it’s effectiveness. Lol.

Our team definitely improved, despite injuries and virtually no bench. We were overwhelmed by Duke in the regular season and only lost by four in the tourney.
Beat sparty too. Two teams many picked to be national champion. That is after strangling two of the highest powered offenses in the nation in TCU and ASU (to the lowest totals iirc) That was not a gimmick. It was intentional and it was smart coaching, that despite our relative offensive ineptitude we were able to impose pace, force turnovers, and low percentage shots on superior scoring teams.

And this year with 3+ gifted offensive players joining the team along with a healthy Sidibe, we could be pretty good on both ends.

Well aware of what we have coming back. And you’re missing my point. I don’t know why I bother to respond since we always disagree. Fine. You go you’re way. I go my way. I’m not saying the defense wasn’t effective. Very effective, duh. Yes I’ll still call the zone a gimmick. Any zone. A gimmick stands out because it IS different. Barely anybody uses it. I don’t like it. Once in awhile to mix things up? Sure. That’s my personal preference and obviously it’s a nuiance/aesthetic issue with me. Nobody says the coach can’t coach it or it doesn’t work! News flash. One can still be a diehard fan of the team but not like the exclusive 2-3. I’m sure there are Georgia Tech diehards who don’t like their gimmick offense they throw out there every Saturday in football. Back to my point you miss. Yet, with all the effectiveness of the defense we were in one possession games with pretty much everybody. Sparty shot 26% from the floor and I think 17% from 3 and they NEARLY WON! One cannot be considered a good or very good team, IMO, if the offense is that bad where these other teams are still in these games til the end. When JB says (paraphrasing) that we don’t get assists because we don’t pass the ball; that’s not a good team. Obviously this all should get better this season. Even if the strategy was to hold the ball (yes it worked at times), stall/save energy, whatever; that doesn’t correlate necessarily to a good basketball team in my eyes. To do nothing all possession except hold it and/or pass back and forth, until Tyus or Oshae go 1-on-1 and we pray for something good. So, in summary. Defense last year...good...excellent in the Tourney. Offense last year...terrible...terrible in the Tourney. Thus you get an average team if one finds a median. Just a reminder that we had 14 regular season losses and 10 conference losses. We took advantage of an opportunity but were an average ‘play in game’ team as usually most of them are who get sent to Dayton (and I was there). Good enough for ya?

 

[longtimefan]

Well aware of what we have coming back. And you’re missing my point. I don’t know why I bother to respond since we always disagree. Fine. You go you’re way. I go my way. I’m not saying the defense wasn’t effective. Very effective, duh. Yes I’ll still call the zone a gimmick. Any zone. A gimmick stands out because it IS different. Barely anybody uses it. I don’t like it. Once in awhile to mix things up? Sure. That’s my personal preference and obviously it’s a nuiance/aesthetic issue with me. Nobody says the coach can’t coach it or it doesn’t work! News flash. One can still be a diehard fan of the team but not like the exclusive 2-3. I’m sure there are Georgia Tech diehards who don’t like their gimmick offense they throw out there every Saturday in football. Back to my point you miss. Yet, with all the effectiveness of the defense we were in one possession games with pretty much everybody. Sparty shot 26% from the floor and I think 17% from 3 and they NEARLY WON! One cannot be considered a good or very good team, IMO, if the offense is that bad where these other teams are still in these games til the end. When JB says (paraphrasing) that we don’t get assists because we don’t pass the ball; that’s not a good team. Obviously this all should get better this season. Even if the strategy was to hold the ball (yes it worked at times), stall/save energy, whatever; that doesn’t correlate necessarily to a good basketball team in my eyes. To do nothing all possession except hold it and/or pass back and forth, until Tyus or Oshae go 1-on-1 and we pray for something good. So, in summary. Defense last year...good...excellent in the Tourney. Offense last year...terrible...terrible in the Tourney. Thus you get an average team if one finds a median. Just a reminder that we had 14 regular season losses and 10 conference losses. We took advantage of an opportunity but were an average ‘play in game’ team as usually most of them are who get sent to Dayton (and I was there). Good enough for ya?

I hate to prolong this. . .but here I go.

1. This sub-thread is about SU's defense, but you used up most of a fairly lengthy post talking about the Orange offense. We get it, and don't disagree--the offense was offensive last year. But we're discussing defense.

2. You seem to have a different understanding of the word "gimmick" than I (and several others, I think) have. I think it's a very negative, even pejorative, word. It might be used to describe a box-and-1 or triangle-and-2, but not a classic zone defense.

 

[SoBeCuse]

I hate to prolong this. . .but here I go.

1. This sub-thread is about SU's defense, but you used up most of a fairly lengthy post talking about the Orange offense. We get it, and don't disagree--the offense was offensive last year. But we're discussing defense.

2. You seem to have a different understanding of the word "gimmick" than I (and several others, I think) have. I think it's a very negative, even pejorative, word. It might be used to describe a box-and-1 or triangle-and-2, but not a classic zone defense.

That’s fine re: gimmick. We can both stick to our guns. I chimed in simply when the discussion turned to how to find a true metric to analyze a team’s performance as a whole. Are you all of a sudden a better team at the end of the season when the Tourney kicks in when you have a new lease on life? Does that wipe out what happend all regular season? Hard to answer. I was mainly responding to whoever it was who believed we became some really good team in the Tourney. Or made some big leaps and/or big improvements. Doesn’t mean I wasn’t impressed but I just tried to illustrate that, in my mind, we were pretty average combining the good defense with the terrible offense. Average.