Brycen Goodine Transferring to Providence

[OrangeDW]

Based on our record. JB plays to win right? It’s obviously not working out . It starts at the top . Now we start the annual season of chasing grad transfers. Where is the AD?

Huh? So we would’ve won more if the other guards played more? Again...based on what?

 

[OrangeDW]

The kid who could’ve had the biggest gripe about PT is Edwards. He actually either held his own or produced when he got the chance, numerous times and the guy ahead of him struggled for like 75% of the year.

Our backup guards really didn’t do anything - other than one game for Goodine where he looked better(and still shot 2-6).

Kid was 3-24 from 3 on the year, and had a 1-1 assist to turnover ratio. What was he bringing to the table offensively?

If he wasn’t transferring he wouldn’t get nearly as much hype in this thread.

 

[ORRange]

No one was as high on Brycen as me. I said many times he would beat out Jalen as the PG. But as it turns both weren't good at all. They both looked lost out there. Imo, JB had no choice except to play Brycen more when it didnt matter and even that probably wouldn't have helped. Even Howard seemed to get more done. I'm ticked he's leaving , but with transfer situation these days it's hard to develop kids anymore. It's only going to get worse.

 

[Alsacs]

No one was as high on Brycen as me. I said many times he would beat out Jalen as the PG. But as it turns both weren't good at all. They both looked lost out there. Imo, JB had no choice except to play Brycen more when it didnt matter and even that probably wouldn't have helped. Even Howard seemed to get more done. I'm ticked he's leaving , but with transfer situation these days it's hard to develop kids anymore. It's only going to get worse.

Most kids transfer to play more.
At Syracuse our starting guards are not guys who are so good they are only capable division 1 guards to play.

It’s kinda an indictment when we only have 2 guards come back next year and our only other guard is an incoming Freshman.
We need depth.

Our starters aren’t Markus Howard, Carson Edwards good.

 

[ORRange]

Most kids transfer to play more.
At Syracuse our starting guards are not guys who are so good they are only capable division 1 guards to play.

It’s kinda an indictment when we only have 2 guards come back next year and our only other guard is an incoming Freshman.
We need depth.

Our starters aren’t Markus Howard, Carson Edwards good.

But my point is our backups cant get playing time over Howard Washington. Jalen was given every chance and Brycen made a mess out of his. Brycen was suppose to be a great 3 pt shooter. Look at his stats. I know how you feel, everyone does. We will have to see what the staff does about it. Comment on it then.

 

[DoctorBombay]

Most kids transfer to play more.
At Syracuse our starting guards are not guys who are so good they are only capable division 1 guards to play.

It’s kinda an indictment when we only have 2 guards come back next year and our only other guard is an incoming Freshman.
We need depth.

Our starters aren’t Markus Howard, Carson Edwards good.

This in a nutshell^^^
Once again folks get caught up in the “ they weren’t that good” POV, like somehow that can explain Buddy “Jordan” Boeheim, & Joe “Isiah” Girard getting 36 mins every game.
Fair enough, they weren’t that good. But they weren’t BAD enough to warrant a seat every time they made a single mistake, while our two HOF-like starters were throwing up 36-footers at a clip, and going 1-9...and STILL weren’t getting subbed. Not to mention offering little to nothing on the defensive or rebounding end.
If I’m sitting on that bench, just having had a decent measly few minutes like BG did at ND, and still don’t sniff another second in the 2nd half, you’re damn right I’m gone.
JB’s bench usage numbers, last 7 years, are among the worst in the country. And no need to cue the “yeah, but we went to two F4s” contingent on this one- I agree that was an amazing feat. But those 2 things CAN be mutually exclusive- it doesn’t always have to be one or the other.
We’re trending downward because JB still coaches like he has 5-stars across his roster, and guess what, he doesn’t.
BB and JG played too many minutes, while every other guard played too little, especially BG. Hence the exodus.
Will the old man be flexible enough to change things up moving forward? Doubt it. But Buddy graduates in 2 years, so there’s that...

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

Five more wins is quite a few in a "had we" scenario.

Add in NC State as well. Point is they were all games we could/should won. We were not getting blown out. JB is obviously going to try to win every game and play his best players.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

Nice.

Washington had a better assist to turnover margin, more assists per 40 minutes, more rebounds per 40, more steals per 40, and a better free throw percentage (100% but only 7 attempts) than Girard and BuddyB. He had his shortcomings but don't go saying he couldn't play when he was better than both starting guards in 5 categories.

As far as Goodine is concerned, in the next 3 years he'll prove how good he is. I think he has a lot of potential and should've played more.

As far as Carey is concerned, he needs to get in a running and pressing system that plays 3 or 4 guards and where he isn't the primary ballhandler.

Washington could not shoot, and didn't score. He passed the ball around the perimeter. He was a liability offensively. He's not anywhere close to as good as Joe or Buddy, which is why he didn't play much. His stats are a little skewed, as he had 8 assists vs. 1 TO in the 30 point blowout of GT, where Hughes and Buddy each hit 6 3's. Aside from that game, he had 16 assists vs. 10 TO's on the season, which isn't great.

Goodine might turn out to be a good player. But he wasn't good this year. If Goodine plays 15 MPG this year, is he staying? Probably not.

Agree on Carey.

 

[Ghost]

This in a nutshell^^^
Once again folks get caught up in the “ they weren’t that good” POV, like somehow that can explain Buddy “Jordan” Boeheim, & Joe “Isiah” Girard getting 36 mins every game.
Fair enough, they weren’t that good. But they weren’t BAD enough to warrant a seat every time they made a single mistake, while our two HOF-like starters were throwing up 36-footers at a clip, and going 1-9...and STILL weren’t getting subbed. Not to mention offering little to nothing on the defensive or rebounding end.
If I’m sitting on that bench, just having had a decent measly few minutes like BG did at ND, and still don’t sniff another second in the 2nd half, you’re damn right I’m gone.
JB’s bench usage numbers, last 7 years, are among the worst in the country. And no need to cue the “yeah, but we went to two F4s” contingent on this one- I agree that was an amazing feat. But those 2 things CAN be mutually exclusive- it doesn’t always have to be one or the other.
We’re trending downward because JB still coaches like he has 5-stars across his roster, and guess what, he doesn’t.
BB and JG played too many minutes, while every other guard played too little, especially BG. Hence the exodus.
Will the old man be flexible enough to change things up moving forward? Doubt it. But Buddy graduates in 2 years, so there’s that...

I think one of the problematic aspects of this debate, is that one side gets to ignore gigantic amounts of evidence, whilst focusing on the "upside" - which is kind of what their critical of on the other end. People focusing on the "upside" that may accompany increased minutes.

We've all seen for giant portions of the seasons - first third last year, last third this year - the shooting guard is simply horrendous on offense. Yet, that's forgiven, because, some have a religious like faith in his shooting. It takes some serious mental gymnastics to come up with a defense that doesn't rely upon ignoring slumps that have gone on for VERY long times over the course of two years. All of 2018...the last 10-12 games this season.

I'm more willing to accept the JGIII arguments, because we needed his secondary skills. Playing the PG spot, ability to handle the ball, etc...but he needed rest as well. The other guy has no notable secondary skills.

If our record justified playing these guys - so be it, but we're nowhere near making it with that one. We've been awful.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

I think one of the problematic aspects of this debate, is that one side gets to ignore gigantic amounts of evidence, whilst focusing on the "upside" - which is kind of what their critical of on the other end. People focusing on the "upside" that may accompany increased minutes.

We've all seen for giant portions of the seasons - first third last year, last third this year - the shooting guard is simply horrendous on offense. Yet, that's forgiven, because, some have a religious like faith in his shooting. It takes some serious mental gymnastics to come up with a defense that doesn't rely upon ignoring slumps that have gone on for VERY long times over the course of two years. All of 2018...the last 10-12 games this season.

I'm more willing to accept the JGIII arguments, because we needed his secondary skills. Playing the PG spot, ability to handle the ball, etc...but he needed rest as well. The other guy has no notable secondary skills.

If our record justified playing these guys - so be it, but we're nowhere near making it with that one. We've been awful.

Think you have to go with the players that give you the best chance to win. 15ppg and best shooter on the team is going to play major minutes. Wish we had other guards on the bench that could shoot/score. They’d have played more.

 

[patcuse]

I think one of the problematic aspects of this debate, is that one side gets to ignore gigantic amounts of evidence, whilst focusing on the "upside" - which is kind of what their critical of on the other end. People focusing on the "upside" that may accompany increased minutes.

We've all seen for giant portions of the seasons - first third last year, last third this year - the shooting guard is simply horrendous on offense. Yet, that's forgiven, because, some have a religious like faith in his shooting. It takes some serious mental gymnastics to come up with a defense that doesn't rely upon ignoring slumps that have gone on for VERY long times over the course of two years. All of 2018...the last 10-12 games this season.

I'm more willing to accept the JGIII arguments, because we needed his secondary skills. Playing the PG spot, ability to handle the ball, etc...but he needed rest as well. The other guy has no notable secondary skills.

If our record justified playing these guys - so be it, but we're nowhere near making it with that one. We've been awful.

 

[malpearl31]

We've all seen for giant portions of the seasons - first third last year, last third this year - the shooting guard is simply horrendous on offense. Yet, that's forgiven, because, some have a religious like faith in his shooting. It takes some serious mental gymnastics to come up with a defense that doesn't rely upon ignoring slumps that have gone on for VERY long times over the course of two years. All of 2018...the last 10-12 games this season.

I don't think that Buddy's performance early last year (and you're right, in the first 11 games of 2018-19 he was horrendous) really had any bearing on how many minutes he played this year. Nor do I think it should have - and I bet the overwhelming majority of people on this board would agree with me on this point.

And I also think that it's a little over the top to describe Buddy as "simply horrendous on offense" in the final 10-12 games of this season. He did have his worst performance of the season against Florida State on 2/15, and the game just before that one against NC State was probably his second-worst ACC game of the season. But you have to be fair... he had two good offensive games against Carolina, he was good in Ws against Wake Forest, Ga Tech and BC as well as in the loss to Clemson. And he ranged from fine to below-average against Duke, Louisville and Miami. But saying he was "horrendous on offense" for the entire final third of the season isn't fair, in my opinion. (Note: the Pitt game doesn't really count to me since he got hurt.)

I think most of us would have been perfectly fine with Goodine getting more minutes during the season - I know I said on multiple occasions that I would definitely have played him more if I was the head coach. I just think it's fair to note that Goodine really didn't do very much with the minutes he did get, and that probably factored into JB's reluctance to play him more.

In hindsight - especially with Brycen having performed very well in the Pitt game when Buddy turned his ankle - JB probably should have found a way to get Brycen some more minutes in the final 4 games. The one against Miami sticks out to me the most - if I'm Brycen, I'm definitely pissed that I didn't get any meaningful minutes in that one.

Going forward, I'm going to root like hell that Buddy and Joe improve on both sides of the ball... because the reality is, I'm a rabid SU fan - and those two are gonna get heavy minutes next year (like it or not).

 

[Ghost]

I'm not sure what I'm looking at in relation to what I posted - when I reference the last third of a season, does that show that? It seems like it's based on an entire season.

 

[Ghost]

I don't think that Buddy's performance early last year (and you're right, in the first 11 games of 2018-19 he was horrendous) really had any bearing on how many minutes he played this year. Nor do I think it should have - and I bet the overwhelming majority of people on this board would agree with me on this point.

And I also think that it's a little over the top to describe Buddy as "simply horrendous on offense" in the final 10-12 games of this season. He did have his worst performance of the season against Florida State on 2/15, and the game just before that one against NC State was probably his second-worst ACC game of the season. But you have to be fair... he had two good offensive games against Carolina, he was good in Ws against Wake Forest, Ga Tech and BC as well as in the loss to Clemson. And he ranged from fine to below-average against Duke, Louisville and Miami. But saying he was "horrendous on offense" for the entire final third of the season isn't fair, in my opinion. (Note: the Pitt game doesn't really count to me since he got hurt.)

I think most of us would have been perfectly fine with Goodine getting more minutes during the season - I know I said on multiple occasions that I would definitely have played him more if I was the head coach. I just think it's fair to note that Goodine really didn't do very much with the minutes he did get, and that probably factored into JB's reluctance to play him more.

In hindsight - especially with Brycen having performed very well in the Pitt game when Buddy turned his ankle - JB probably should have found a way to get Brycen some more minutes in the final 4 games. The one against Miami sticks out to me the most - if I'm Brycen, I'm definitely pissed that I didn't get any meaningful minutes in that one.

Going forward, I'm going to root like hell that Buddy and Joe improve on both sides of the ball... because the reality is, I'm a rabid SU fan - and those two are gonna get heavy minutes next year (like it or not).

• Very much concur with the first paragraph!
• Very fair point - in the last 3rd of the year, it's quite easy to say Goodine was, at worst, equal to BB per 40 MPG. I tend to think that's rather worthless statistically...for reasons below, but I can make that argument. I may also argue the second Carolina game, etc...for various reasons weren't outstanding by BB despite stats, but I'll leave it alone as they were fine.
• If you say that about BG, then we're on the same page! I think he did enough to warrant a longer leash - I truly do. I also think with the longer leash, the more you tend to produce. Again, I often reference players like BJ Johnson, who seem to only excel in the odd games where they get some kind of extended run. Whereas, in the games they "suck" and don't produce they're usually pulled off of 1 turnover, or one missed shot. Which leads to bad stats, which is quickly referenced (and quite worthless as a reference point IMO), and makes people rely upon observing other basketball related skills. Which some people don't seem good at it IMO (not you, just a general observation).

Anyway, great response!

 

[malpearl31]

• Very much concur with the first paragraph!
• Very fair point - in the last 3rd of the year, it's quite easy to say Goodine was, at worst, equal to BB per 40 MPG. I tend to think that's rather worthless statistically...for reasons below, but I can make that argument. I may also argue the second Carolina game, etc...for various reasons weren't outstanding by BB despite stats, but I'll leave it alone as they were fine.
• If you say that about BG, then we're on the same page! I think he did enough to warrant a longer leash - I truly do. I also think with the longer leash, the more you tend to produce. Again, I often reference players like BJ Johnson, who seem to only excel in the odd games where they get some kind of extended run. Whereas, in the games they "suck" and don't produce they're usually pulled off of 1 turnover, or one missed shot. Which leads to bad stats, which is quickly referenced (and quite worthless as a reference point IMO), and makes people rely upon observing other basketball related skills. Which some people don't seem good at it IMO (not you, just a general observation).

Anyway, great response!

Thanks, man. I feel like there's been too much "talking past one another" on this board recently, I think most of us are closer to each other's views than we realize. I understand why JB didn't play Goodine more - but at the same time it's totally fair to be critical of the way he distributed minutes in the backcourt, because it resulted in a transfer that the staff apparently didn't want.

Hopefully Kadary is a better fit - because he appears to be a better ball handler and penetrator than Brycen - and because at 6'-7" he may even be better than Brycen was defensively (whether he's at the top of the zone or playing some at the forward spot).

Related question (sort of): Which spot do people think is easier/harder to play in the zone? If JB plays Joe, Buddy and Kadary together for stretches next season, do people think that Buddy should play more at the forward spot (instead of up top next to Joe)? Or would it be preferred to keep Buddy at the guard spot and have Kadary slide down to the forward position on D? Personally, I think Buddy might struggle more at the forward spot... maybe this question deserves its own thread?

 

[Day2]

Had we?
We didn’t.
Maybe if the bench played more we win those games.
Then if you want to play the what if game.

We lost two of those games because of fluke injuries to Hughes.

 

[kcsu]

I think Buddy would get abused playing in the back of the zone. Hes not tall enough, long enough and too slow to get to the corner. Up top at least he has his height.

 

[Alsacs]

We lost two of those games because of fluke injuries to Hughes.

Hughes injury excuses the NC State loss at home.
As he was needed to beat them.

Miami didn’t have their best player in the whole game. Losing that game was inexcusable.

Also playing the what if game like that guy does so one sidely is just stupid.
I don’t care to look up every single game we played and show what if’s could have gone the other way.

 

[Newhouser]

Thanks, man. I feel like there's been too much "talking past one another" on this board recently, I think most of us are closer to each other's views than we realize. I understand why JB didn't play Goodine more - but at the same time it's totally fair to be critical of the way he distributed minutes in the backcourt, because it resulted in a transfer that the staff apparently didn't want.

Hopefully Kadary is a better fit - because he appears to be a better ball handler and penetrator than Brycen - and because at 6'-7" he may even be better than Brycen was defensively (whether he's at the top of the zone or playing some at the forward spot).

Related question (sort of): Which spot do people think is easier/harder to play in the zone? If JB plays Joe, Buddy and Kadary together for stretches next season, do people think that Buddy should play more at the forward spot (instead of up top next to Joe)? Or would it be preferred to keep Buddy at the guard spot and have Kadary slide down to the forward position on D? Personally, I think Buddy might struggle more at the forward spot... maybe this question deserves its own thread?

Personally I would want the best athlete and the stronger/tougher player. Until I see Richmond in person so I will hold off anointing him anything but I am assuming he is a better athlete and stronger with the ball than Buddy.

 

[Ghost]

Thanks, man. I feel like there's been too much "talking past one another" on this board recently, I think most of us are closer to each other's views than we realize. I understand why JB didn't play Goodine more - but at the same time it's totally fair to be critical of the way he distributed minutes in the backcourt, because it resulted in a transfer that the staff apparently didn't want.

Hopefully Kadary is a better fit - because he appears to be a better ball handler and penetrator than Brycen - and because at 6'-7" he may even be better than Brycen was defensively (whether he's at the top of the zone or playing some at the forward spot).

Related question (sort of): Which spot do people think is easier/harder to play in the zone? If JB plays Joe, Buddy and Kadary together for stretches next season, do people think that Buddy should play more at the forward spot (instead of up top next to Joe)? Or would it be preferred to keep Buddy at the guard spot and have Kadary slide down to the forward position on D? Personally, I think Buddy might struggle more at the forward spot... maybe this question deserves its own thread?

I think Buddy could play both - I think he's fundamentally sound enough to give us brief minutes at forward. He definitely knows how to play the game. I'm sure he struggles to rebound, but that may be a weak spot regardless - so you do what you can. I don't know that he can "cheat up" and recover as well as some of other guys. If Kadary ends up being decent on defense, and we can shut down some of the easy penetration, passing inside, it may offset what we lose on the boards, etc...anyway. We picked up a lot of fouls, etc...because of that.

I think he struggles more there, but I think he can do it in brief stints.

I also think that may require him needing a few more minutes of rest, but with Kadary perhaps that's reality.

I think if people just watch, say, the first UNC game, you can see that BB reserves energy on the defensive end. Which isn't ideal for someone that's already a bit limited athletically - he sat for BG for just a minutes that half, and absolutely sells out on defense for the last 8 to 10 minutes of the first half. I would always trade that Buddy for the 3 minutes of shooting we lose when BG was in.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

I think Buddy could play both - I think he's fundamentally sound enough to give us brief minutes at forward. He definitely knows how to play the game. I'm sure he struggles to rebound, but that may be a weak spot regardless - so you do what you can. I don't know that he can "cheat up" and recover as well as some of other guys. If Kadary ends up being decent on defense, and we can shut down some of the easy penetration, passing inside, it may offset what we lose on the boards, etc...anyway. We picked up a lot of fouls, etc...because of that.

I think he struggles more there, but I think he can do it in brief stints.

I also think that may require him needing a few more minutes of rest, but with Kadary perhaps that's reality.

I think if people just watch, say, the first UNC game, you can see that BB reserves energy on the defensive end. Which isn't ideal for someone that's already a bit limited athletically - he sat for BG for just a minutes that half, and absolutely sells out on defense for the last 8 to 10 minutes of the first half. I would always trade that Buddy for the 3 minutes of shooting we lose when BG was in.

This is a really great conversation to have. I felt that the reason the forwards had to extend so ridiculously far this year was because our two ironman guards were so bad at covering the required amount of floor. I thought Buddy looked good in a forward position the couple times he did it because he had a quick guard next to him who could help with the slides. Maybe he could be a decent rebounder from there, but I'm not sure he has that in him. He's not a stick your neck in and come out with the ball kind of guy. That I've seen. Joe is.

 

[VaBeachOrFan]

Huh? So we would’ve won more if the other guards played more? Again...based on what?

No, I think it means we would have won a bit less but developed players better, with the likelihood that we'd keep them longer.-VBOF

 

[FRANKIEFAN]

The kid who could’ve had the biggest gripe about PT is Edwards. He actually either held his own or produced when he got the chance, numerous times and the guy ahead of him struggled for like 75% of the year.

Our backup guards really didn’t do anything - other than one game for Goodine where he looked better(and still shot 2-6).

Kid was 3-24 from 3 on the year, and had a 1-1 assist to turnover ratio. What was he bringing to the table offensively?

If he wasn’t transferring he wouldn’t get nearly as much hype in this thread.

Brycen has athleticism the other guards didn't and we looked far differently defensively when he played. But point taken. He also didn't show any ability to handle minutes at the 1 and wasn't big enough for the 3. You'll want him if Eli leaves and Kadary/Woody underwhelm but its not a huge loss.

Other teams scored on Edwards with ease. Too gun shy to even try and do anything offensively. Give him a year to redshirt because we have no minutes at the 5 for him and another project C to get some run. 21/22 him and Ajok will be third year guys with 3 years left I think the combo might be pretty good. I'd have only played Edwards more if we were in more blowouts.

 

[Ghost]

This is a really great conversation to have. I felt that the reason the forwards had to extend so ridiculously far this year was because our two ironman guards were so bad at covering the required amount of floor. I thought Buddy looked good in a forward position the couple times he did it because he had a quick guard next to him who could help with the slides. Maybe he could be a decent rebounder from there, but I'm not sure he has that in him. He's not a stick your neck in and come out with the ball kind of guy. That I've seen. Joe is.

+1

I only recall one time where he did it for extended minutes (UVA maybe?), and he was fine. He was 138% better than I expected - boxed out, defended the corner well. He seemed to defend passing lanes very well. That was encouraging - I don't know that he'll ever rebound well, but I don't think we'll ever need him to go HUGE minutes there regardless. So...

 

[Alsacs]

+1

I only recall one time where he did it for extended minutes (UVA maybe?), and he was fine. He was 138% better than I expected - boxed out, defended the corner well. He seemed to defend passing lanes very well. That was encouraging - I don't know that he'll ever rebound well, but I don't think we'll ever need him to go HUGE minutes there regardless. So...

Buddy played the wing against Wake Forest and more than held his own.