Another 10-Loss Season... | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

Another 10-Loss Season...

The team depth has improved, but I'm not sure the quality has significantly improved and the offense is still a weak point.

And free throws ... lol. Keita was 80/138 (58%) for his career. Syracuse was 13/23 (56.5%) last night and that is not optimal. 275th in the country in free throw % on the season. Coby White was 10/10. Since 2010-11, Syracuse has had 8 players make 100% of free throws with more than 10 attempts. Last year Oshae was 16/16. He's lost 14 percentage points from his FT%.

and last I checked, 3pt % was about at the same level. just staggering futility from the most important stat in this sport. It's a wonder they've won 9 conference games so far.
 
I do think Boeheim’s absense for 9 games was a big reason though. We lost to some teams that we shouldn’t have during that stretch.

True...but Boeheim was still the coach when Trevor Cooney didn't know the difference between a 1-point deficit and 2 and decided to heave up a 35-footer with time on the clock against Pitt.

Flawed as this team is, I'm taking it all day over 2016.
 
still wondering why everyone thought it would be so different this year. Last years team was not v good and it’s basically the same team

Aren't players supposed to improve?

Plus, we added a highly touted freshman and Hughes became eligible.
 
True...but Boeheim was still the coach when Trevor Cooney didn't know the difference between a 1-point deficit and 2 and decided to heave up a 35-footer with time on the clock against Pitt.

Flawed as this team is, I'm taking it all day over 2016.

Love him or hate him Cooney would be this teams best shooter outside of Buddy.

That team was better both offensively and defensively.
 
Having ten losses lately seems to be the norm for this team. Its really disappointing however I also feel Boeheim could sub the younger players more often (Braswell and Carey) and he just hasn't. Braswell seems to have tremendous potential and I just don't understand with all the foul trouble yesturday why he didn't play. It makes zero sense to me. Carey I understand more because of turnovers but how much worse is he than Howard? Boeheim will always go with the seniors in those situations according to what I've seen.
 
If we were in the top 25 a bunch the past 5 years I'd see your point, but we are more like the 35-40th best team in the country over that period.
Then make that case. Pointing out the number of losses while ignoring the increased number of conference games isn’t telling the entire story, though.
 
Then make that case. Pointing out the number of losses while ignoring the increased number of conference games isn’t telling the entire story, though.

In 2002-03, we played 18 conference games. We went 14-4.

In 2009-10, we played 18 conference games. We went 15-3.

In 2011-12, we played 18 conference games. We went 17-1.

In 2017-18, we played 18 conference games. We went 9-9.

I'm not sure how we have a "increased number of conference games". Your math is a little off.
 
1) This is the toughest league we have ever played in. It's got 3 of the top 5 teams in the country and two other ranked teams. The middle of the conference would contend in other conferences and possibly win the Pac 12. The bottom teams would be middle teams in other top conferences and maybe win the mid-majors.

2) The NCAA has stressed the non-conference games in recent years and the years of coming into conference play 13-0, 12-1 or even 11-2 every year are gone. We want to play our old Big Eats rivals and those two influences have toughened up our non-conference schedule so it can't be the cake-walk we are used to.

That means that only our best teams are going to wind up with single digit losses. Those teams from the Big Eats Era that had 8-9 losses would have 10+now. The teams we've had with fewer than 8 losses since 1980-81, (when we played a full Big Eats schedule for the first time), are 1985-86, 1986-87, 1989-90, 1990-91, 1993-94, 1999-00, 2002-03, 2004-05, 2009-10, 2011-12 and 2013-14. That's how often single digit losses are likely to happen now.

The issue is: when will we have another team that good? The impact of the probation should have worn off by now. I don't see the zone defense as the culprit although the idea that we don't recruit big men for offense anymore has some credibility, although if DaJuan Coleman had not destroyed his knees, we might not be saying that). I just don't like our "chuck it up or lower your shoulder and drive" offense. I want us to play like UNC: share the ball, get everyone involved and run, run run whenever you can. I think it would help our offense and our recruiting tremendously. We'd have more of those single digit loss seasons. Beyond that, there wouldn't be so many dull, painful-to-watch losses.
 
More excuses.

Let me circle back to the five straight 10+ loss seasons.

In all of those seasons, we have had 10 losses in the regular season.

10, 14, 15, 14, 13. If we were 24-10, fine. We were 30-10 in 2012-13, went to the final four, but were 23-8 at the end of the regular season.

We haven't ended the regular season with 20 wins over this span, either.

There’s a direct correlation between having more than ten losses and less than twenty wins, so that’s six of one and a half dozen of the other.

Check the polls. There are a number of ranked teams from the ACC, Big 10 and Big 12 that will finish the season with 10 or more losses. Check the NET rankings. You’ll see a number of SEC teams that will do the same. Teams that will make the tournament. Kansas is #1 in RPI. They will most likely finish the year with exactly 10 losses.

It’s not an excuse, it’s a fact. The top conferences are playing more conference games and that’s translating to more losses.

It doesn’t change the fact that we’ve also seen an uptick in non-conference losses. It doesn’t change the fact that we’re good for at least one or two bad conference losses every year. The margin of error is smaller and we’re not doing enough to overcome it.
 
In 2002-03, we played 18 conference games. We went 14-4.

In 2009-10, we played 18 conference games. We went 15-3.

In 2011-12, we played 18 conference games. We went 17-1.

In 2017-18, we played 18 conference games. We went 9-9.

I'm not sure how we have a "increased number of conference games". Your math is a little off.


If your point is that we were better in 2002-3, 2009-10 and 2011-12 than we were in 2017-18, you win the point. However, expecting 2002-3, 2009-10 and 2011-12 to be the norm- the seasons by which other seasons are measured is a bit much.
 
Then make that case. Pointing out the number of losses while ignoring the increased number of conference games isn’t telling the entire story, though.

The case is we haven't been ranked in 5 years during the regular season. I don't care who's in the conference. We lost to Georgia freakin Tech and we've lost to them like 4 times since we joined the league. That's like losing to Providence.

If you want to say Florida State and Virginia Tech are better programs than go ahead.
 
If your point is that we were better in 2002-3, 2009-10 and 2011-12 than we were in 2017-18, you win the point. However, expecting 2002-3, 2009-10 and 2011-12 to be the norm- the seasons by which other seasons are measured is a bit much.

I'd at least expect 11 conference wins every year as a benchmark. Maybe 12 starting next year as we go to 20 games.
 
I think it’s our best team since the 2014 season.
I don't know if that should be taken as a compliment to this year's team or an indictment of the last 5 years.
 
In 2002-03, we played 18 conference games. We went 14-4.

In 2009-10, we played 18 conference games. We went 15-3.

In 2011-12, we played 18 conference games. We went 17-1.

In 2017-18, we played 18 conference games. We went 9-9.

I'm not sure how we have a "increased number of conference games". Your math is a little off.
That’s why I said the conferences are larger first. They’re deeper. More games against better teams. And I’m not just talking about us. The Big East has always had a lot of teams. But the other conferences have expanded and do play more conference games now, including the ACC.
 
The case is we haven't been ranked in 5 years during the regular season. I don't care who's in the conference. We lost to Georgia freakin Tech and we've lost to them like 4 times since we joined the league. That's like losing to Providence.

If you want to say Florida State and Virginia Tech are better programs than go ahead.

We were ranked during the regular season in 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 and this year. We weren't ranked at the end of the regular season in those years.
 
We were ranked during the regular season in 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 and this year. We weren't ranked at the end of the regular season in those years.

Not during ACC play.
 
1) This is the toughest league we have ever played in. It's got 3 of the top 5 teams in the country and two other ranked teams. The middle of the conference would contend in other conferences and possibly win the Pac 12. The bottom teams would be middle teams in other top conferences and maybe win the mid-majors.

2) The NCAA has stressed the non-conference games in recent years and the years of coming into conference play 13-0, 12-1 or even 11-2 every year are gone. We want to play our old Big Eats rivals and those two influences have toughened up our non-conference schedule so it can't be the cake-walk we are used to.

That means that only our best teams are going to wind up with single digit losses. Those teams from the Big Eats Era that had 8-9 losses would have 10+now. The teams we've had with fewer than 8 losses since 1980-81, (when we played a full Big Eats schedule for the first time), are 1985-86, 1986-87, 1989-90, 1990-91, 1993-94, 1999-00, 2002-03, 2004-05, 2009-10, 2011-12 and 2013-14. That's how often single digit losses are likely to happen now.

The issue is: when will we have another team that good? The impact of the probation should have worn off by now. I don't see the zone defense as the culprit although the idea that we don't recruit big men for offense anymore has some credibility, although if DaJuan Coleman had not destroyed his knees, we might not be saying that). I just don't like our "chuck it up or lower your shoulder and drive" offense. I want us to play like UNC: share the ball, get everyone involved and run, run run whenever you can. I think it would help our offense and our recruiting tremendously. We'd have more of those single digit loss seasons. Beyond that, there wouldn't be so many dull, painful-to-watch losses.

The league is very top heavy this year, so it gives the impression, based on your opinion, that it's the "toughest league we have ever played in." I'm not so sure in regards to your "ever" sentiment. The middle of the conference teams are, well just that, middling. The bottom of the conference teams (this year) are simply putrid. Your assertion that these bottom feeder teams (again, this year) would be middle teams in other "top conferences" is somewhat comical. Same with probably winning the mid-major conferences.

During the months of November and December a lot of those same teams you suggest would be in the positions you claim, took some pretty bad losses in those OOC games.
 
The case is we haven't been ranked in 5 years during the regular season. I don't care who's in the conference. We lost to Georgia freakin Tech and we've lost to them like 4 times since we joined the league. That's like losing to Providence.

If you want to say Florida State and Virginia Tech are better programs than go ahead.
I haven’t disputed any of that. But ten losses or twenty wins are arbitrary benchmarks. Sort of like rushing for 1000 yards in the NFL. Used to mean something. Doesn’t carry the same weight anymore.
 
The ACC is top heavy it isn’t as deep as the Big East from 2010-2013.
It’s just Duke/North Carolina/Virginia are better than UConn/Louisville/Villanova from the old Big East.
The last 5 years we have been Seton Hall in the regular season and Syracuse in the NCAAT.
The ACC being a tougher conference is a joke excuse the Big East was better it’s part of the reason the ACC added Syracuse/Pitt/Notre Dame/Louisville.
 
The league is very top heavy this year, so it gives the impression, based on your opinion, that it's the "toughest league we have ever played in." I'm not so sure in regards to your "ever" sentiment. The middle of the conference teams are, well just that, middling. The bottom of the conference teams (this year) are simply putrid. Your assertion that these bottom feeder teams (again, this year) would be middle teams in other "top conferences" is somewhat comical. Same with winning the mid-major conferences.

During the months of November and December a lot of those team you suggest would in the positions you claim, took some pretty bad losses in those OOC games.
The ACC is probably a 9-bid conference this year.
 
The ACC is probably a 9-bid conference this year.

So, the bubble as many have alluded to, is extremely weak this year. Therefore, whether 9 teams gets in or 8, it's quite relative in nature.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
169,796
Messages
4,853,058
Members
5,980
Latest member
jennie87

Online statistics

Members online
250
Guests online
1,415
Total visitors
1,665


...
Top Bottom