An age old discussion (minutes logged)

[rrlbees]

It's seriously amazing so many syracuse fans who post here never acknowledge potential faults with boeheim, but instead get incredibly defensive whenever it's brought up. It's a legit discussion to have on an Internet forum. No one is perfect, it's a phrase everyone on the planet knows. It's almost weird to me how some people get with regards to JB "criticism".

As posted in another thread.

In our first 3 losses we shot better and scored more points in the 2nd half? Didnt happen in the Nova game but then shooting 63% in a half isnt commonplace. For the season weve also scored more in the 2nd half. Minutes played isnt causing us to lose.

 

[pfister1]

How many of those coaches that play more are more successful than jb? The list of more successful coaches is very, very small.

But while he's won lots and lots of games, he only has one National Championship in 30+ years so he isn't perfect. That means there may be things he could do differently that might make us better. So the argument that he is great so don't question what he's doing doesn't fly very far with me.

 

[orange79]

But while he's won lots and lots of games, he only has one National Championship in 30+ years so he isn't perfect. That means there may be things he could do differently that might make us better. So the argument that he is great so don't question what he's doing doesn't fly very far with me.

I don't think anyone (or many) is saying you can't criticize JB. I do think that 39 years and the resume he has suggest that what he is doing works, in general. The way some people post around here, you would think JB is a lot closer to Craig Esherick than to Coach K.

 

[OttoMets]

As posted in another thread.

In our first 3 losses we shot better and scored more points in the 2nd half? Didnt happen in the Nova game but then shooting 63% in a half isnt commonplace. For the season weve also scored more in the 2nd half. Minutes played isnt causing us to lose.

But it's not just the shooting that suffers (especially early in the season). Mental fatigue, poor decision-making, loss of quickness - I see evidence of these things late, especially with Joseph. He looks tired and I don't doubt he could have been more effective with 38 or 40 minutes than with 45 on Saturday. He already has difficulty cutting off dribble penetration; no need to increase the degree of difficulty.

 

[HastingsCuse]

Over the past 20 years SU's record in OT games is 20-8. If fatigue from playing a short bench was having a "negative effect on games outcomes", why is SU so successful in games that are longer than 40 minutes?

 

[jordoo]

The thread tittle says it all. No one is moving anyone from either side of this argument because neither side is 100% right. Both sides just need to admit that the other sides philosophy is used very successfully and either way can work while both have strengths and drawbacks.

Merry Christmas guys and gals.

 

[Jack Hall]

Over the past 20 years SU's record in OT games is 20-8. If fatigue from playing a short bench was having a "negative effect on games outcomes", why is SU so successful in games that are longer than 40 minutes?

That is a very good point. But it works both ways. The overall body of works says that JB knows what hes doing, which he pretty clearly does. But by your same rational (if you are arguing that the end results speak for themselves), the fact that we lost to villanova in OT after leading by 15, the guards both playing 45 mins and MG playing 39 mins had something to do with that loss...ie the strategy in the end did not work (and almost every fan ive seen on here has said that they thought SU was the better team that day and deserved to win). I am not blaming JB, he is far from perfect, but he is one of the best ever and clearly knows what hes doing. Imo there are three guys on the bench that just need to get better and be able to give a rest to certain starters at critical junctures of the game in a similar way nba superstars usually rest up before crunch time...

 

[rrlbees]

Over the past 20 years SU's record in OT games is 20-8. If fatigue from playing a short bench was having a "negative effect on games outcomes", why is SU so successful in games that are longer than 40 minutes?

Because fatigue isn't a factor.

 

[GonzoInMD]

That is a very good point. But it works both ways. The overall body of works says that JB knows what hes doing, which he pretty clearly does. But by your same rational (if you are arguing that the end results speak for themselves), the fact that we lost to villanova in OT after leading by 15, the guards both playing 45 mins and MG playing 39 mins had something to do with that loss...

The fact that we got out to that 15 point lead shooting 63% probably meant that we weren't going to sustain that lead, no matter what.

 

[Jack Hall]

The fact that we got out to that 15 point lead shooting 63% probably meant that we weren't going to sustain that lead, no matter what.

Could be but we were up 14 in the second half. All we had to do was be 12 pts worse than vu over the last 18 mins. It didnt happen. Why is not a matter of fact its a matter of opinion

 

[Jack Hall]

Because fatigue isn't a factor.

If fatigue is not a factor, then why do guys like kobe and lebron sit at all ? Are College kids really in superior shape to Lebron? Lol
Ok i get it, nba guys play 80 games plus playoffs, college kids play 30-40 games. So if length of season is a big factor, which it is, then i get sitting lebron in the regular season. But if fatigue isnt a factor why does lebron and kobe and KD sit in the playoffs?? Imo fatigue is a factor. We agree to disagree

 

[Full_Rebar]

So the best two teams since the title team were the 09-10 and 11-12 squads right? Interesting how the 09-10 had only two guys above 30 minutes per game and the 11-12 team had one guy above 30, but hey we win more when we play guys heavy minutes
http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/syracuse/2010.html#per_game::none
http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/syracuse/2012.html#per_game::none

 

[Jack Hall]

So the best two teams since the title team were the 09-10 and 11-12 squads right? Interesting how the 09-10 had only two guys above 30 minutes per game and the 11-12 team had one guy above 30, but hey we win more when we play guys heavy minutes
http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/syracuse/2010.html#per_game::none
http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/syracuse/2012.html#per_game::none

Yup i agree w you. But its not so much about JB , hes the same coach, its more about the quality of the bench players. Those teams had scoop, kj, dion and jsuth coming off the bench. Makes a huge difference. We just havent had those types of players off the bench the last two years obviously

 

[Antiprodigy]

Your arguments for spreading minutes out shouldn't be with posters on an internet message board. Your arguments for it should be with JB, himself. The problem is, you won't get a second of his time to talk about it.

Spreading minutes out is NOT JB's philosophy! He rarely has done it, and as he has gotten older, has done it even less. I don't understand why this has to be brought up at least once a month on this board?

I understand you are frustrated by this issue. But you need to learn acceptance. He isn't going to change now. Your best hope is that some day, when he retires, and Hop takes over, that Hop will agree with your philosophy.

Of course, if Hop isn't as successful as JB, which is highly likely (just from a statistical standpoint) then you will have plenty of people telling you "I told you so". Be careful what you wish for.

I suggest those in the "more minutes" party take up golf. It's amazing how much aggression you can take out on those little balls. That way you can save your frustration for another, less frequented issue to discuss.

I know that would reduce my frustration level (with this topic)

p.s - and for the record, I'm not opposed to the idea of spreading minutes, I'm just tired of reading about it. I have already reached my zen state with this issue.

 

[rrlbees]

So the best two teams since the title team were the 09-10 and 11-12 squads right? Interesting how the 09-10 had only two guys above 30 minutes per game and the 11-12 team had one guy above 30, but hey we win more when we play guys heavy minutes http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/syracuse/2010.html#per_game::none http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/syracuse/2012.html#per_game::none

We played 7 in 09-10. 11-12 is the true outlier.

 

[Full_Rebar]

Yup i agree w you. But its not so much about JB , hes the same coach, its more about the quality of the bench players. Those teams had scoop, kj, dion and jsuth coming off the bench. Makes a huge difference. We just havent had those types of players off the bench the last two years obviously

I just think the "JB doesn't play a deep rotation" argument is false. Clearly he will go deeper if he trusts guys, and I'm not arguing for 10+ minutes for Patterson, but I think he can be more than a DNP against good teams.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

Over the past 20 years SU's record in OT games is 20-8. If fatigue from playing a short bench was having a "negative effect on games outcomes", why is SU so successful in games that are longer than 40 minutes?

Our record in 6-OT games is 1-0.

 

[Jack Hall]

I just think the "JB doesn't play a deep rotation" argument is false. Clearly he will go deeper if he trusts guys, and I'm not arguing for 10+ minutes for Patterson, but I think he can be more than a DNP against good teams.

Imo if he andor BJ dont play consistently in ACC , the end of the season could get ugly. But its up to RP and BJ

Edit and when i say play consistently, i mean play some mins in ea half of most games

 

[br801]

That's a really terrible example to make your argument. How about if Riley actually had some game experience throughout the season he would have been able to fill in better when it actually mattered. You know that player development thing again.

I think we have seen enough of Riley at Eastern Michigan to know he wasn't going to be enough to get us through to the end but certainly if he was more ready we could have advanced further than we did. I still think Kris and Rick not really showing up against Butler cost us more than Riley not being very good or experienced. That game was close and has some strange calls down the stretch which could have pushed us over the top if they were different. The argument could be made that Kris was worn out because I do recall he was a bit banged up but no one played extended minutes in that 7 man rotation because Scoop and Kris played around 20 each off the bench.

Riley getting additional playing time during the season against a few more cupcakes was not going to leave him much more ready than he was, despite what you believe. As jordoo pointed out, there were numerous factors other than Riley's performance that contributed more to the Butler loss. As I recall watching that game at the time, I thought Riley played pretty well, all things considered. Pinning that loss on his performance that day (and by extension JB's use of him during the regular season) is revisionist history at its worst.

 

[NineOneSeven]

As posted in another thread.

In our first 3 losses we shot better and scored more points in the 2nd half? Didnt happen in the Nova game but then shooting 63% in a half isnt commonplace. For the season weve also scored more in the 2nd half. Minutes played isnt causing us to lose.

Cool story. The premise of my post still remains the same. Forget the subject matter.

 

[rrlbees]

Cool story. The premise of my post still remains the same. Forget the subject matter.

Your premise is wrong. A tactical decision? Sure, criticize. A strategic one? Hard to do that when you compare his resume to yours.

 

[pfister1]

That is a very good point. But it works both ways. The overall body of works says that JB knows what hes doing, which he pretty clearly does. But by your same rational (if you are arguing that the end results speak for themselves), the fact that we lost to villanova in OT after leading by 15, the guards both playing 45 mins and MG playing 39 mins had something to do with that loss...ie the strategy in the end did not work (and almost every fan ive seen on here has said that they thought SU was the better team that day and deserved to win). I am not blaming JB, he is far from perfect, but he is one of the best ever and clearly knows what hes doing. Imo there are three guys on the bench that just need to get better and be able to give a rest to certain starters at critical junctures of the game in a similar way nba superstars usually rest up before crunch time...

The uneven officiating had far more to do with the outcome of the Nova game than fatigue imo.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Your premise is wrong. A tactical decision? Sure, criticize. A strategic one? Hard to do that when you compare his resume to yours.

 

[Townie72]

But while he's won lots and lots of games, he only has one National Championship in 30+ years so he isn't perfect. That means there may be things he could do differently that might make us better. So the argument that he is great so don't question what he's doing doesn't fly very far with me.

But the idea that anyone on this board has a better plan shouldn't fly very far with anyone. The problem isn't with Boeheim's mistakes and perceived weaknesses, its the utter lack of credibility of his critics.

 

[Bayside44]

A few things:

-the zone and TV time outs rests our guys enough.
-JB is starting backup players now. He's 3 down from where he thought he would be this season.
-Even at that we've had a punchers chance in every game minus one and generally are in almost every game in the last 2 minutes for forever, so we have a pretty good idea our guy can coach.