Bud and the Manchild discuss last night's box score | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

Bud and the Manchild discuss last night's box score

It was crazy and was probably factor in him twisting his already sore ankle. I’ve seen the carrier dome floor go down and it’s a bunch of rectangular floor pieces that snap together like a puzzle. It seems like one piece may not have been tightly fitting. Unless it’s the sub floor that was an issue. SU used, or did, a blue plastic type sub floor that is like the actual floor and snaps together. Maybe there was a defect that caused the wooden floor to buckle some. Shouldn’t have happened no matter the cause.

Yeah, I measure everything in "how mad would I be if this happened to Syracuse" and if that happened to, say, Jesse in the title game, especially in that situation of a tight game, I would lose my mind.

Thanks for the context of the Dome floor, that is very helpful and makes a ton of sense.
 
North Carolina starters played 187 minutes to Kansas 169 on Saturday night.

On Monday night UNC starters played 180 minutes and Kansas played 167 minutes.

Here is my question. Did one team look fresher down the stretch? Did another team look like they were wearing down giving up a 16 point lead? One teams starters played 31 less minutes then the other teams and one of the star players had a ankle injury on top of the fatigue.
 
I would add that, with 6 new players coming in who hopefully will provide the nucleus for a revival of the program in the next few years, and the transfer portal always looming, I hope Jim will make sure that all the new guys get plenty of chances to show what they can do next year before he settles into his final rotation.

This is the most important thing that JB has to change, if he wants to turn things around.

You should only play guys 36 minutes a game if they are All Americans, and so much better than the other guys on the bench.

If your bench players are nearly as good as the starters, then give them some minutes, and give yourself some options at the end of the game, or if someone gets injured.
 
Another incredibly well kept secret. You don’t need a deep bench to play man D
but you do need A bench...
foul trouble, injury, illness, ejections...
Granted the TV timeouts can give a player time to catch his/her breath.
But stuff happens...
 
Bud Poliquin calls his old show once a week to chat with his old partner, (I suspect he still owns a piece of it), Jim Lerch, alias The Manchild. Today they were discussing last night's championship game, especially the box score:


Lerch pointed out that, of the 10 starters, two guys played 40 minutes, another played 38, another 37, two more 36 and another 34. The others played 30, 29 and 27. The Tarheels had a 6th man, Puff Johnson, who played 18 minutes. Their only other participant played 2 minutes and didn't score. Kansas also had a 6th man and a very important one, Remy Martin, who played 21 minutes. Two other guys played 7 and 2 minutes. The 7-minute guy scored 2 points. Twelve players played 389 of the 400 minutes (97.25%) and scored 137 of the 141 points (97.2%).

Lerch suggested that this put to lie the notion that a coach has got to play a lot of players to be successful. Bud acknowledged the point but still wishes that "coaches would do a better job of developing their bench, not to win a game but in case of the inevitable injuries." However, he rejected the notion that games are lost due to fatigue. "They just get going and already there's a time out".

I would add that, with 6 new players coming in who hopefully will provide the nucleus for a revival of the program in the next few years, and the transfer portal always looming, I hope Jim will make sure that all the new guys get plenty of chances to show what they can do next year before he settles into his final rotation.
They get plenty of chances to show what they can do: those chances are called practice as well as individual workouts. The notion that a coach does not have a really good idea of a player's capabilities is silly.
 
They get plenty of chances to show what they can do: those chances are called practice as well as individual workouts. The notion that a coach does not have a really good idea of a player's capabilities is silly.

I never said that. Let me amend my statement to "a chance to show what they can do in game action". That's a different level than practice and I'd like these young players invested in the program as early as possible and giving them a chance to play will help do that more than riding the pine while a transfer forward gets all the time.
 
God bless you for listening to that show for anything longer than a minute
The Syracuse local shows are unbearable, I listen during the season and I often wonder if any of these dolts even watch the games.
 
The Syracuse local shows are unbearable, I listen during the season and I often wonder if any of these dolts even watch the games.

I like them because the hosts tend to be friendly, it's easy to call in with an opinion, (or now type one onto their 'Twitch' site), and they focus on local teams and issues while still covering the national issues about as well as what I hear on the national shows, which know less about local sports, are far harder to call into and tend to be hosted by someone whose brand is his 'atttiude'.
 
The Syracuse local shows are unbearable, I listen during the season and I often wonder if any of these dolts even watch the games.

Did you like Danny Parkins? IMO, he was the best.
 
Did you like Danny Parkins? IMO, he was the best.
Yes. You could tell he wasn't long for this market. But I like the people who stayed, too.
 
I never said that. Let me amend my statement to "a chance to show what they can do in game action". That's a different level than practice and I'd like these young players invested in the program as early as possible and giving them a chance to play will help do that more than riding the pine while a transfer forward gets all the time.

If they aren’t getting enough done in practice for the coach to have enough confidence in them for them to “earn” playing time, how can you expect a coach to put them on the floor in a game to see what they can do……. unless of course the opponent is Colgate or some other team that has no prayer. Sorry.
 
Last edited:
I never said that. Let me amend my statement to "a chance to show what they can do in game action". That's a different level than practice and I'd like these young players invested in the program as early as possible and giving them a chance to play will help do that more than riding the pine while a transfer forward gets all the time.
Practice is nothing like a game. Not even close
 
I really liked upon further review with Chris and Steve. I thought they had 97.7 headed in a great direction.
 
If they aren’t getting enough done in practice for the coach to have enough confidence in them for them to “earn” playing time, how can you expect a coach to put them on the floor in a game to see what they can do……. unless of course the opponent is Colgate or some other team that has no prayer. Sorry.

Do you think that some of the guys on our teams these past few years have been SO MUCH BETTER than other guys on the bench that OF COURSE they should play the whole game?

You do know that our players have been logging the most minutes of anyone in the entire country for the last several years. Even Boeheim himself didn't used to play guys this many minutes 15-20 years ago.

Derrick Freaking Coleman did not average 34 minutes a game until his senior year, when he averaged 35, and he is the best player I've ever seen at Syracuse.

Billy Owens started every game as a frosh, but was used only 32 minutes a game, and averaged 35 minutes a game for his whole career. Sherman Douglas, counting only his 3 years as a starter, averaged 32 to 35 minutes a game.

A 4 year starter for 126 games, John Wallace played 30, 32 and 33 minutes a game his first three seasons, and then only 36 minutes in 1996, the year when we basically only played six guys.

He has to play more guys 10-15 minutes a game (1) to build depth, and (2) to manage his personnel and relationships with his players better.

You have to make EVERYBODY feel like part of the team.
 
If they aren’t getting enough done in practice for the coach to have enough confidence in them for them to “earn” playing time, how can you expect a coach to put them on the floor in a game to see what they can do……. unless of course the opponent is Colgate or some other team that has no prayer. Sorry.

Again, not what I'm talking about.
 
Do you think that some of the guys on our teams these past few years have been SO MUCH BETTER than other guys on the bench that OF COURSE they should play the whole game?

You do know that our players have been logging the most minutes of anyone in the entire country for the last several years. Even Boeheim himself didn't used to play guys this many minutes 15-20 years ago.

Derrick Freaking Coleman did not average 34 minutes a game until his senior year, when he averaged 35, and he is the best player I've ever seen at Syracuse.

Billy Owens started every game as a frosh, but was used only 32 minutes a game, and averaged 35 minutes a game for his whole career. Sherman Douglas, counting only his 3 years as a starter, averaged 32 to 35 minutes a game.

A 4 year starter for 126 games, John Wallace played 30, 32 and 33 minutes a game his first three seasons, and then only 36 minutes in 1996, the year when we basically only played six guys.

He has to play more guys 10-15 minutes a game (1) to build depth, and (2) to manage his personnel and relationships with his players better.

You have to make EVERYBODY feel like part of the team.

And EVERYBODY has to earn playing time and that’s done on the practice floor. The question might not be how good are the starters, but are the reserves deserving of court time? So the fact that DC or Billy did or did not play 40 mpg has little to do with current roster management in the way you are suggesting. Who were the players behind them, how hard did they work as compared to current bench players.

What were the actual game situations when the historical bench players you are looking at played? Was it in hotly contested games or were they accumulating minutes in games that were already in the win column?
 
And EVERYBODY has to earn playing time and that’s done on the practice floor. The question might not be how good are the starters, but are the reserves deserving of court time? So the fact that DC or Billy did or did not play 40 mpg has little to do with current roster management in the way you are suggesting. Who were the players behind them, how hard did they work as compared to current bench players.

What were the actual game situations when the historical bench players you are looking at played? Was it in hotly contested games or were they accumulating minutes in games that were already in the win column?

Have you watched many practices? There's a lot of drills, and not as much scrimmaging as you might expect. A lot of practice is some boring stuff. It's nothing like a game situation, with a live oponent.
 
You are correct, but back to my point about the caliber of player.
Caleb Love number 7 overall recruit
RJ Davis number 40 overall
Armando Bacot number 27 overall

Jimmy Boeheim not ranked
Buddy Boeheim number 349
Joe Girard number 202
That is not useful information. It's about the players behind the players getting the minutes. SU didn't have anyone competent/healthy for most of the season.
 
This is the most important thing that JB has to change, if he wants to turn things around.

You should only play guys 36 minutes a game if they are All Americans, and so much better than the other guys on the bench.

If your bench players are nearly as good as the starters, then give them some minutes, and give yourself some options at the end of the game, or if someone gets injured.
In SU's case, the bench guys were no where near to being as good as the starters. Literally JV to the Varsity.
 
wait, didn't one of the guys actually hurl on the court, demonstrating that it's really difficult for anyone to maintain that frenetic pace for an entire half, let alone a game? Bacot rolled his ankle late due to fatigue. Not in favor of such a broad brush, reality is it of course varies game to game, year to year, depending on personnel and style of play. it doesn't have to be 1 rigid rule to follow, always, no matter what.

He rolled his ankle late "due to fatigue"

that is flat out irresponsible to just roll out like that.
 
That is not useful information. It's about the players behind the players getting the minutes. SU didn't have anyone competent/healthy for most of the season.
You don't think the quality of players recruited is relevant information?!?! That's the whole point of this! UNC has superior talent to play 30+ MPG. Meanwhile, Jim has a roster with cobbled together with pieces that don't fit.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,584
Messages
4,713,655
Members
5,908
Latest member
jc824

Online statistics

Members online
60
Guests online
1,929
Total visitors
1,989


Top Bottom