10 Minutes a Game

[SWC75]

Jim Boeheim made a comment that Villanova was only using 6 players. Jim is often accused of using only 6-7 players while other coaches use 8-9 or more. It provoked a discussion about how many minutes per game a player would have to play to be considered “used” and it was proposed that 10 minutes a game b the standard. I decided to see how many players have averaged 10 minutes a game for Jim’s teams over the years. I thought about using the numbers of games x 10 minutes as the standard as some players don’t play in all the games but decided that if a player averaged 10 minutes a game in the games he played, he was part of the rotation in those games. Likely, he was injured, suspended or had left the team for the games he didn’t play in. But Jim was using him when he was available if he averaged 10 minutes a game.

Orangehoops doesn’t have minutes before the 1980-81 season, and neither does Cuse.com, the SU Athletic site or Sports Reference.com, so we’ll start there. That’s the Carrier Dome Era.
(Note: Orangehoops doesn’t average minutes. Sports reference doesn’t have them until 1983-84. Cuse.com has the minutes for 1980-81 and 1982-83 but nothing for 1981-82. I actually used a Media Guide from 2017-18 which had everything from 1980-81 and then supplemented it with Sports Reference.com for subsequent years.)

Syracuse Orange Basketball Season Records

All-Time Season Won/Loss record for Syracuse University Basketball Orange along with the team's final AP ranking, and the head coach. Also includes their conference record for the Big East and ACC seasons. The Syracuse Orange were formerly known as the Syracuse Orangemen.

orangehoops.org

Year-by-Year Statistics/Final Release - Syracuse University Athletics

2022-23 Season 2022-23 Results and Statistics 2022-23 Final Release (pdf.) First Row (l to r): Katie Scanlon, director of student-athlete development, Dan Sh...

cuse.com

Syracuse Orange Index | College Basketball at Sports-Reference.com

1980-81 9 players played at least 10 minutes a game Team record: 22-12
1981-82 8: 16-13
1982-83 9: 21-10
1983-84 7: 23-9
1984-85 7: 22-9
1985-86 10: 26-6
1986-87 8: 31-7
1987-88 8: 26-9
1988-89 7: 30-8
1989-90 8: 26-7
1990-91 8: 26-6
1991-92 8: 22-10
1992-93 7: 20-9
1993-94 7: 23-7
1994-95 8: 20-10
1995-96 7: 29-9
1996-97 9: 19-13
1997-98 6: 26-9
1998-99 10: 21-12
1999-2000 8: 26-6
2000-01 7: 25-9
2001-02 8: 23-13
2002-03 8: 30-5
2003-04 8: 23-8
2004-05 9: 27-7
2005-06 8: 23-12
2006-07 8: 24-11
2007-08 8: 21-14
2008-09 8: 28-10
2009-10 8: 30-5
2010-11 8: 27-8
2011-12 10: 34-3
2012-13 9: 30-10
2013-14 8: 28-6
2014-15 8: 18-13
2015-16 7: 23-14
2016-17 9: 19-15
2017-18 8: 23-14
2018-19 9: 20-14
2019-20 7: 18-14
2020-21 7: 18-10
2021-22 7: 11-11

In the one year where 6 players played 10+ minutes per game, our record was 26-9
In the 11 years when 7 players have played 10+ minutes a game, our average record is 22-10
In the 20 years when 8 players have played 10+ minutes a game, our average record is 26-9
In the 7 years when 9 players have played 10+ minutes a game, our average record is 23-12
In the 3 years when 10 players have played 10+ minutes a game, our average record is 27-7
The first and last stats are small samples. It appears that 8 guys playing 10+ minutes is optimum for the Boeheim system. And in these 42 years, that’s been the average – exactly. (336/42)

Let’s compare that to the current Top 25, (from Sports reference.com)
Auburn 10 players
Gonzaga 8
UCLA 9
Purdue 10
Kentucky 7
Houston 10
Arizona 9
Baylor 9
Duke 8
Kansas 8
Wisconsin 8
Villanova 8
Michigan State 9
Texas Tech 10
Providence 8
Ohio State 10
Connecticut 9
Illinois 8
So California 9
Iowa State 9
Xavier 8
Tennessee 10
Texas 10
Marquette 9
Louisiana State 8

That’s an average of 8.52, half a player more than Jim Boeheim’s average. But basically, 8 guys is more of a minimum than an average. And Jim has used 7 guys three years in a row now. So, yes, Jim Boeheim has a tighter rotation than a typical Top 25 coach and it’s less now than it used to be. But the differences aren’t huge. And the players have to prove they belong out there. Jim will go above 7 and even above 8 if that many players prove they can help the team – or if he’s searching for guys who can.

 

[pfister1]

It would be interesting to see how that might change if you eliminate games with large margin of victory (or loss if there are those) from consideration. Assuming if we are winning big you would expect more guys to play more minutes, not because that’s the game strategy, but because you play the bench more when you are up or down by a large number of points.

 

[goofnoff]

Thanks for all that work. I hate it when myths are trampled by a herd of facts.

 

[djcon57]

“it was proposed that 10 minutes a game b the standard.”

FYI, if you reread the thread. You proposed that the players playing single digits weren’t part of the rotation. You used the term “single digits”. I was following your standard...and agree with it fwiw

“So, yes, Jim Boeheim has a tighter rotation than a typical Top 25 coach and it’s less now than it used to be.”

Thanks for the research. Really well done.

 

[djcon57]

Thanks for all that work. I hate it when myths are trampled by a herd of facts.

The myth that Villanova plays 6 guys? Or most teams play 7?

Absolutely agreed

 

[MikeSU02]

So JB has gone to a tighter rotation as the overall roster that he’s built has gotten worse?

Also, the year we had six guys go, two of those six had long nba careers and either are including Burgan or Blackwell.

That team would toy with this team.

 

[SWC75]

It would be interesting to see how that might change if you eliminate games with large margin of victory (or loss if there are those) from consideration. Assuming if we are winning big you would expect more guys to play more minutes, not because that’s the game strategy, but because you play the bench more when you are up or down by a large number of points.

That would involve going through 42 years of box scores and also doing the same thing for the top 25 to see if other coaches do the same thing. Be my guest.

I think we can stipulate that coaches tend to use fewer players in close games. When we lost to Kentucky in the 1996 final, they had 9 guys who played in the NBA and 7 guys played 190 of the 200 minutes. When we lost to Indiana in 1987, they had 7 guys play 195 minutes, two of them going 40. When we beat Kansas, six guys played 195 minutes for them, one of them 40.

 

[SWC75]

So JB has gone to a tighter rotation as the overall roster that he’s built has gotten worse?

Also, the year we had six guys go, two of those six had long nba careers and either are including Burgan or Blackwell.

That team would toy with this team.

The issue has less to do with the overall strength of the team than how many players had proven themselves useful. If JB had 5 NBAers and 5 guys who weren't, the 5 NBAers would get virtually all of the playing time. The current team might have one NBAers but the top 5 are a lot better than the guys behind them, so they get most of the playing time.

 

[orangecuse]

It would be interesting to see how that might change if you eliminate games with large margin of victory (or loss if there are those) from consideration. Assuming if we are winning big you would expect more guys to play more minutes, not because that’s the game strategy, but because you play the bench more when you are up or down by a large number of points.

Yeah, for sure. It would also be interesting to see what those numbers look like in conference games. We all know that in those early season games of past, especially being ranked so often as we were, along with the typical early season home "cupcake" type schedule, blowout W's, never leaving the confines of the Dome until January, mantra, etc. I'd bet that's where the crux of those minutes were likely shared.

 

[CousCuse]

That would involve going through 42 years of box scores and also doing the same thing for the top 25 to see if other coaches do the same thing. Be my guest.

I think we can stipulate that coaches tend to use fewer players in close games. When we lost to Kentucky in the 1996 final, they had 9 guys who played in the NBA and 7 guys played 190 of the 200 minutes. When we lost to Indiana in 1987, they had 7 guys play 195 minutes, two of them going 40. When we beat Kansas, six guys played 195 minutes for them, one of them 40.

That proves the point then that in tight games, coaches are going to rely on their best and most proven players.

 

[SWC75]

Yeah, for sure. It would also be interesting to see what those numbers look like in conference games. We all know that in those early season games of past, especially being ranked so often as we were, along with the typical early season home "cupcake" type schedule, blowout W's, never leaving the confines of the Dome until January, mantra, etc. I'd bet that's where the crux of those minutes were likely shared.

There is no doubt that Jim and most other coaches "tighten their rotation" for conference games. The early season games are when you give everyone a chance to play and see what they can do. But it would be hard to average 10 minutes a game if you didn't play much in conference games.

 

[Alsacs]

If we had 7 really good players I would want a tight rotation.

If we are playing the players we have been playing a lot of minutes then I wouldn’t want a tight rotation.

Our quality of talent has gone down.

Thus our records.

Pretty simple.