Boeheim's Best Coaching Decision w/ This Team

[cuse2013]

Playing Gbinije at Point.

I mean come on. Three years ago when Gbinije was sitting out due to redshirt and he had him playing some PG, I didn't get it. In the preseason chatter this year, I did not believe Kaleb wouldn't start and that Gbinije would start at point.

But to have the foresight to convert a 6'7 SF to PG was crazy but brilliant. Granted, partially it happened because he didn't have a better option, and you can blame that on him/the staff. But what a move. Obviously Kaleb floundered and Frank wasn't ready for full time work. Saved the season.

 

[OttoMets]

I wonder if anyone would say this if we lost to Dayton.

 

[rrlbees]

Playing Gbinije at Point. I mean come on. Three years ago when Gbinije was sitting out due to redshirt and he had him playing some PG, I didn't get it. In the preseason chatter this year, I did not believe Kaleb wouldn't start and that Gbinije would start at point. But to have the foresight to convert a 6'7 SF to PG was crazy but brilliant. Granted, partially it happened because he didn't have a better option, and you can blame that on him/the staff. But what a move. Obviously Kaleb floundered and Frank wasn't ready for full time work. Saved the season.

If he wanted Mali in the starting lineup, he had no choice.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

Mal was a better SF than Kaleb was a PG.

 

[dasher]

I wonder if anyone would say this if we lost to Dayton.

We beat Dayton by 19 points.

 

[OttoMets]

We beat Dayton by 19 points.

If you're making a point, it's not clear.

If mine was unclear, it's this: the rising tide of a Final Four run lifts all boats and has sent the two seniors off with a nice legacy. Had that run -- hardly spurred by Gbinije's play (perhaps the least productive five-game stretch of his season) at the point -- not occurred, few would laud the shift of a small forward to the point on a 14-loss team as a good coaching move.

If we're here to talk about good coaching moves, I'd be quicker to praise Boeheim's use of Cooney as a driver rather than a shooter during the last five games, or maybe his second-half adjustments against Virginia.

Gbinije as the point, as someone else mentioned, was a "best of a host of bad options" gamble; Boeheim wanted offense this year, and to him that meant giving heavy minutes to Richardson, Cooney, and Gbinije. The results were mixed, though March was exciting.

 

[CorduroyG]

I wonder if anyone would say this if we lost to Dayton.

i said it nov 21

http://syracusefan.com/threads/g-at-the-point.96581/

 

[orangenirvana]

If you're making a point, it's not clear.

If mine was unclear, it's this: the rising tide of a Final Four run lifts all boats and has sent the two seniors off with a nice legacy. Had that run -- hardly spurred by Gbinije's play (perhaps the least productive five-game stretch of his season) at the point -- not occurred, few would laud the shift of a small forward to the point on a 14-loss team as a good coaching move.

If we're here to talk about good coaching moves, I'd be quicker to praise Boeheim's use of Cooney as a driver rather than a shooter during the last five games, or maybe his second-half adjustments against Virginia.

Gbinije as the point, as someone else mentioned, was a "best of a host of bad options" gamble; Boeheim wanted offense this year, and to him that meant giving heavy minutes to Richardson, Cooney, and Gbinije. The results were mixed, though March was exciting.

It's not as if SU barely escaped Dayton on a last-second shot. It was a blowout.

If SU had lost to Dayton then a lot would be different. That's the way life works. But the perception of the decision to use G as the starting PG as opposed to Joseph or Howard I think would have remained the same for the most part. Would the team had been better if one of those two had been the full-time starting PG and Richardson came off the bench? I doubt it.

 

[OttoMets]

i said it nov 21

http://syracusefan.com/threads/g-at-the-point.96581/

Nice, good find. I'm not saying you were wrong, it's just the case that we got there in spite of this move not working out very well. Gbinije improved on a lot of things, but he never became a good facilitator (though your and Boeheim's hope was legitimate - if we could develop a tall athletic scoring wing into a good point guard, our ceiling would be really high).

This is where the Final Four phenomenon comes into play - this move is praised, even though Gbinije never developed into a point guard, had a nice senior year on a 14-loss team as a pretty efficient scorer and shooter (in fact, he'd probably have been an even better scorer and shooter if he hadn't been burdened with this difficult job), then had a really tough offensive slump over four of the five tournament games (.96 points per shot over the five) in which two of his teammates upped their offensive production to make up for his struggles. Final Fours cover a lot of flaws. If we hadn't had that run, he'd be Mike, the forward who couldn't quite get the hang of playing point guard on a 14-loss team, and no one would talk about move as a particularly good personnel choice by Boeheim.

 

[dasher]

If you're making a point, it's not clear.

If mine was unclear, it's this: the rising tide of a Final Four run lifts all boats and has sent the two seniors off with a nice legacy. Had that run -- hardly spurred by Gbinije's play (perhaps the least productive five-game stretch of his season) at the point -- not occurred, few would laud the shift of a small forward to the point on a 14-loss team as a good coaching move.

If we're here to talk about good coaching moves, I'd be quicker to praise Boeheim's use of Cooney as a driver rather than a shooter during the last five games, or maybe his second-half adjustments against Virginia.

Gbinije as the point, as someone else mentioned, was a "best of a host of bad options" gamble; Boeheim wanted offense this year, and to him that meant giving heavy minutes to Richardson, Cooney, and Gbinije. The results were mixed, though March was exciting.

My point is that the Dayton game was a blow out. Not exactly a game that someone could claim as a game that if it didn't go our way, things would have looked differently. I would agree with you if you would have used the Zags as the game instead of Dayton. But a trip to the sweet 16 with this team would have been viewed as successful.

 

[OttoMets]

It's not as if SU barely escaped Dayton on a last-second shot. It was a blowout.

If SU had lost to Dayton then a lot would be different. That's the way life works. But the perception of the decision to use G as the starting PG as opposed to Joseph or Howard I think would have remained the same for the most part. Would the team had been better if one of those two had been the full-time starting PG and Richardson came off the bench? I doubt it.

Maybe, that's a tough one.

There's no evidence to support my hypothesis (same with all these coulda-woulda-shoulda personnel guesses), but I'm sticking to my guns on this one: a Howard/Gbinije/Richardson/Roberson/Coleman starting lineup (with 25-30 minutes a game for Cooney to sub at shooting guard and Gbinije only playing point when Howard's out) would have had fewer than 14 losses.

No way to prove it, of course, and for all I know we'd have gone 24-7 but then gotten a crappy draw and lost in the first round. I'm not asking to go back in time and trade a Final Four for that.

 

[OttoMets]

My point is that the Dayton game was a blow out. Not exactly a game that someone could claim as a game that if it didn't go our way, things would have looked differently. I would agree with you if you would have used the Zags as the game instead of Dayton. But a trip to the sweet 16 with this team would have been viewed as successful.

Gotcha, I just think that the Final Four gives an aura of success to everything, including things (the experiment of Gbinije at the point) that weren't objectively successful.

 

[dasher]

Gotcha, I just think that the Final Four gives an aura of success to everything, including things (the experiment of Gbinije at the point) that weren't objectively successful.

I think the move was as successful as it could be. We really didn't have that good a team. We didn't score in the low post and worse, we didn't defend at the low post. But tournament aside, we had some great wins.

 

[OttoMets]

I think the move was as successful as it could be. We really didn't have that good a team. We didn't score in the low post and worse, we didn't defend at the low post. But tournament aside, we had some great wins.

Sure, but a huge part of why we didn't have a good team is that we didn't start a good point guard. And I don't think it's a coincidence that we saw improvement late in the year when Frank got consistent time of the bench.

Agree that the hole in the middle was going to be our kryptonite no matter who we played at the other positions.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Gbinije was great this year as a point in the pinch, and I'm not sure what the staff did to change Cooney's approach in the tournament, but I wish we saw more of that the past couple years. Those 5 games were the best I've seen him play overall. I think if Cooney played the same way he did in the tournament all year we would of beat Pitt at least once, Fla St the 2nd time, Georgetown and Wisconsin. Glad he found his groove at the right time though.

 

[UnderHisOwnPower]

Playing Gbinije at Point.

I mean come on. Three years ago when Gbinije was sitting out due to redshirt and he had him playing some PG, I didn't get it. In the preseason chatter this year, I did not believe Kaleb wouldn't start and that Gbinije would start at point.

But to have the foresight to convert a 6'7 SF to PG was crazy but brilliant. Granted, partially it happened because he didn't have a better option, and you can blame that on him/the staff. But what a move. Obviously Kaleb floundered and Frank wasn't ready for full time work. Saved the season.

or was it sitting the Coon dog in the second half of games starting the last week of the season, and getting Frankie some more run in his place? That worked pretty well too, and given the trend of minutes played over Trevor's career, about as much of a long shot as moving a SF to PG a couple years ago.

 

[Millhouse]

or was it sitting the Coon dog in the second half of games starting the last week of the season, and getting Frankie some more run in his place? That worked pretty well too, and given the trend of minutes played over Trevor's career, about as much of a long shot as moving a SF to PG a couple years ago.

agree. mg to point made room for richardson and howard getting a few minutes gave the other three guys much needed rest

cooney averaged 34 minutes the last 8 games and shot 39% from three.

the prior 8 games was 37 minutes and 29%

he hit 48% of his 4.8 threes per game in 34 minutes per game his last 6 games.

better late than never!

 

[UnderHisOwnPower]

agree. mg to point made room for richardson and howard getting a few minutes gave the other three guys much needed rest

cooney averaged 34 minutes the last 8 games and shot 39% from three.

the prior 8 games was 37 minutes and 29%

he hit 48% of his 4.8 threes per game in 34 minutes per game his last 6 games.

better late than never!

since moving G to point happened awhile ago, I think that little rotational adjustment, plus a savvy use of the press were the 2 adjustments that most allowed the run and show JB still has his coaching chops.

 

[Millhouse]

since moving G to point happened awhile ago, I think that little rotational adjustment, plus a savvy use of the press were the 2 adjustments that most allowed the run and show JB still has his coaching chops.

in my head i was including howard and somehow it didn't make into my typing. sorry about that. it's a combination of trusting howard and giving richardson more minutes

 

[Jack Hall]

This is along the same lines of what duke will go thru next year. They dont really have a true point guard next year, didnt this year either. So what do they do? Do they stick out their best 5? Like we did this year with guys playing out of position. hey it got us to FF. or do they try to get a guy like Thornton who is not one of their best 5 guys to play point? My guess is they stick out their best 5 and see how it goes. Awful nice to have 6-7 mickeyDs but its tough to win a title with no really effective point guard

My own feeling is when you stick a 67 wing like G at point guard , its gonna be a mismatch somehow. Some games it was a mismatch favoring SU and some games the mismatch went against SU

 

[Ghost]

or was it sitting the Coon dog in the second half of games starting the last week of the season, and getting Frankie some more run in his place? That worked pretty well too, and given the trend of minutes played over Trevor's career, about as much of a long shot as moving a SF to PG a couple years ago.

I think that was a pivotal moment for the team, and for TC. That benching was a huge shock that late in the season.

Following it up with the early run to the bench after a bad shot in either the Dayton or MTSU game, and we got a much more controlled TC for the stretch run. Good job by JB (to the extent that he finally did it), and TC responded and played pretty well and finished with a flurry.

 

[Newhouser]

I think JB sat Mike, Mal, and Robey too when they were struggling. I think the decision to trust Frank and DC resulted in starters facing a little pine when not playing well.

 

[Forloveoforange]

I think guys like Cooney being benched may have started with Hopkins.

 

[rrlbees]

I think guys like Cooney being benched may have started with Hopkins.

I don't buy this whole benching that people talk about. Exactly one game he sat out more than normal. Maybe that Pitt second half JB liked what the group on the court was doing? When it came down to crunch time, TC was in. And with the improvement of Frank over the course of the season, JB gave more blows to TC, G and Mali. What other games was he "benched"?

In the 5 NCAA games, TC played the same exact number of minutes per game he averaged during the season. He took exactly the same number of shots per game as he did in the regular season. In the UNC game, he played more minutes and took way more shots than his per game averages.

The one difference in the NCAA was he took fewer 3's. He did start driving more than he did but IMO, that was by design as much as anything. It seemed like all the guards and Mal all drove more. Even Lydon tried to drive from the foul line some.

Except for Pitt 2nd half maybe, I just don't see any benchings and nothing really changed after that regarding PT or shots.

 

[Ghost]

I don't buy this whole benching that people talk about. Exactly one game he sat out more than normal. Maybe that Pitt second half JB liked what the group on the court was doing? When it came down to crunch time, TC was in. And with the improvement of Frank over the course of the season, JB gave more blows to TC, G and Mali. What other games was he "benched"?

In the 5 NCAA games, TC played the same exact number of minutes per game he averaged during the season. He took exactly the same number of shots per game as he did in the regular season. In the UNC game, he played more minutes and took way more shots than his per game averages.

The one difference in the NCAA was he took fewer 3's. He did start driving more than he did but IMO, that was by design as much as anything. It seemed like all the guards and Mal all drove more. Even Lydon tried to drive from the foul line some.

Except for Pitt 2nd half maybe, I just don't see any benchings and nothing really changed after that regarding PT or shots.

That one game had a lot of meaning toward us even potentially playing in the post season. I think that's why people place more significance on it than if it happened against BC with 10 games left to go. He even left FH in after the lead went back up to around 13 or 15.
Also, I'll rewatch the beginning of the games so I can cite correctly, but JB pulled TC early in one of the first tourney games immediately after one of his fading left early shot click threes. I'm not sure I'd ever seen that b4. Maybe it was all happenstance, but I think those two things are huge moved by JB going out of his comfort zone.