Buddy's game

[hoopsupstate]

Scoring 25 points on offense doesn't have anything to do with how frequently guards drive past him into the teeth of the zone on defense.

But those same athletes that are going by him are also getting torched. You can’t have it both ways. I guess no one can guard anyone.

 

[hoopsupstate]

I was wrong. I thought Goodine would be good and better than Girard. He is not. He reminds me a bit of Louie McCroskey. That is scary.

Not even close in comparison. Goodine is a great kid and teammate. You would never use those words about McCroskey.

 

[tbonezone]

well your equation included the subset ( buddy and quincey ) > elijah. false. and your suggestion that no analyst thinks avg. points per game is an important statistic is lunacy. that's how they hand out mvp trophies. my equation simply factors in shot attempts as well. (fwiw buddy just recently broke into positive territory)

 

[Zelda Zonk]

Not even close in comparison. Goodine is a great kid and teammate. You would never use those words about McCroskey.

I know, right? Not even close. Goodine has much better table manners, can make cotton candy, and has nicer socks.

 

[malpearl31]

well your equation included the subset ( buddy and quincey ) > elijah. false. and your suggestion that no analyst thinks avg. points per game is an important statistic is lunacy. that's how they hand out mvp trophies. my equation simply factors in shot attempts as well. (fwiw buddy just recently broke into positive territory)

You’re completely misrepresenting what I’ve said. My response to your initial post was to point out that your rudimentary analysis suggested that QG (1.2) was better than Buddy (1.1) and that separately, BS (1.6) was better than EH (1.5). Nowhere did I suggest that Buddy and Quincy were both > Elijah...

Dude, you’re at the bottom of a hole. Stop digging. If you’re truly looking to dive deeper into statistics to better understand the sport, there are plenty of places to go to... but not one of them will back up your original post that suggested Quincy is a better offensive option than Buddy or that Bourama is a better offensive option than Hughes.

 

[tbonezone]

i never said better "option" . i said more "efficient" per shot. and those facts my friend are indisputable.

 

[malpearl31]

i never said better "option" . i said more "efficient" per shot. and those facts my friend are indisputable.

Awesome. So we agree that although Bourama and Quincy are slightly more efficient than Elijah and Buddy, respectively (when viewed through the lens of your "actual points per shot attempt" metric) - they are not better options for SU offensively.

I'm glad we had this back and forth, I truly learned a lot.

 

[Bayside44]

I don’t care about athleticism. They gave up 100 to Providence and UMass.

And held James Harden to 10 points.

 

[OttoMets]

And held James Harden to 10 points.

Eh, he was drunk that day.

My lasting Flynn/Devendorf defensive memory is the two of them half-heartedly waving at Longsleeves Tony Crocker as he set his feet and poured in six or seven 20-footers over them the week after the Harden game.

 

[Alsacs]

That Flynn team could play man to man defense.
It allowed us to beat Kansas. If we sprinkled in man to man and zone with that team we would have been more dangerous.
JB didn't want to do that though. Flynn and Paul Harris were really good athletes and play man to man defense.

JB doesn't even want to entertain playing anything but man to man though. Buddy/Girard wouldn't be good in man to man though either so I get it atleast with them but not athletes like Flynn/Harris.

 

[Herkimercus]

The frontline is the problem.

True, as I watch games around the country, there are plenty of bigs to sign. I don't necessarily mean 7 footer, but 6'10" guys who can play inside and outside with some length and skills. Its uncanny. From the p12 to the mac we are missing the boat.

 

[kcsu]

The issue is that we are not a great fit for centers. What can we offer a top flight 5?

 

[IthacaMatt]

Would be nice if Buddy moved more without the ball, drawing defenders all over the perimeter, like Cooney.

It’d also be nice if Buddy passed as well as Joe and Marek, or followed his shot like Elijah often does.

He doesn’t, so if he’s not hitting shots he does very little else to put us in a position to win.

I feel as though Quincy, Elijah, Marek and at times Joe are the only players who are mutli-talented on our team. I think Bourama’s progressed a little too.

I think he played a much more active floor game when he only played 10 minutes a half.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Eh, he was drunk that day.

My lasting Flynn/Devendorf defensive memory is the two of them half-heartedly waving at Longsleeves Tony Crocker as he set his feet and poured in six or seven 20-footers over them the week after the Harden game.

Well, first year they made the NIT, the next year played against Blake Griffin in the Sweet 16.
6 OT Game vs. UConn at MSG.
Not that terrible.

 

[IthacaMatt]

But those same athletes that are going by him are also getting torched. You can’t have it both ways. I guess no one can guard anyone.

It's different. Buddy doesn't often beat guys off the dribble. He shoots threes in transition and coming off curl screens. He doesn't run off the ball like Cooney or GMac used to, but Cooney and GMac both took too many contested threes - Buddy doesn't force it as much with guys hanging on him.

Buddy tries to do more than just be a shooter, like drive into the lane for that 10 foot shot in the paint. He's working hard. He tries to play the angles and get tipped balls inside the zone. He's just not a 35 minute guy at this point in his career. Maybe in a year or two.

 

[gmoney44]

The issue is that we are not a great fit for centers. What can we offer a top flight 5?

we can offer them mad sprints into the stands to cover the baseline three. No other team in America can offer that.

 

[FloridaFan]

we can offer them mad sprints into the stands to cover the baseline three. No other team in America can offer that.

this made me laugh alot for some reason

 

[OttoMets]

Well, first year they made the NIT, the next year played against Blake Griffin in the Sweet 16.
6 OT Game vs. UConn at MSG.
Not that terrible.

Not that relevant, either.

Blake Griffin got his, as expected. What the game plan didn't call for was the 9-point-per-game guard dropping 28 as Flynn and Devendorf wandered around up top with their hands at their sides. That was the difference in that game.

I'm kind of surprised that anyone who watched the game doesn't share that memory.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Not that relevant, either.

Blake Griffin got his, as expected. What the game plan didn't call for was the 9-point-per-game guard dropping 28 as Flynn and Devendorf wandered around up top with their hands at their sides. That was the difference in that game.

I'm kind of surprised that anyone who watched the game doesn't share that memory.

That team underachieved for the talent we had. Some want to say they "could have" played d, but they didn't. The entire goal was just to outscore people and we had Rautins play the back line about half of each game so JB could play all of his shooters.

Also Girard/Buddy can at least be as good as Gmac/Devo 2006 zone.

 

[OttoMets]

That team underachieved for the talent we had. Some want to say they "could have" played d, but they didn't. The entire goal was just to outscore people and we had Rautins play the back line about half of each game so JB could play all of his shooters.

Also Girard/Buddy can at least be as good as Gmac/Devo 2006 zone.

Agreed. To me, Buddy's looked like he knows what he's doing since the beginning. Last year he was just too slow. This year...I don't know. I don't see defensive improvement. But he's obviously got potential, he's got the size and the head.

Girard's new at this, I have little doubt that he'll make a leap when things click. (I've got a little doubt, he does matador it at times, but he'll improve if he wants to earn minutes.)

They can definitely be better than the 2006 guys, the same defensive effort wasn't demanded of players on those teams.

 

[Chip]

If you think Buddy is our biggest problem, you have serious problems evaluating what you see. Who do you think should be playing over Buddy? Playing another player the defense doesn’t have to cover is not going to help matters.

Therein lies the problem because that question has no good answer. Directly, he's not the problem, but indirectly he sort of is.

It's a situation of our own making.

 

[orangecuse]

Therein lies the problem because that question has no good answer. Directly, he's not the problem, but indirectly he sort of is.

It's a situation of our own making.

Exactly. The fact that Buddy is a starter and getting the typical JB starter type minutes (at the beginning of his sophomore year to boot) speaks for itself regarding the considerable dip in talent this team has on the floor nowadays.

 

[ivorytower]

I think you fellas are pointing fingers at the wrong Boeheim.

Younger one is a specialist filling his role fairly well while elder is the one who assembled a disjointed team that limits flexibility in proper usage of assorted talents

 

[Ghost]

Agreed. To me, Buddy's looked like he knows what he's doing since the beginning. Last year he was just too slow. This year...I don't know. I don't see defensive improvement. But he's obviously got potential, he's got the size and the head.

Girard's new at this, I have little doubt that he'll make a leap when things click. (I've got a little doubt, he does matador it at times, but he'll improve if he wants to earn minutes.)

They can definitely be better than the 2006 guys, the same defensive effort wasn't demanded of players on those teams.

I guess my trouble with this is that there seems to be some inequity in how minutes are earned.

Buddy has essentially earned close to unlimited minutes based on being able to do one thing well, and a whole host of other things at quite pedestrian levels, all the way down to fairly bad (defense). As a shooting guard, if we're being honest, most everything other than shooting is really bad for a decent P5 team, but, whatever...

How do you bust into the rotation, or past that guy with the way it's constructed? He's in a can't fail situation. Last year was much the same. He's being assessed on exceling at the one and only thing he's good at. Which the team needs, but we need A LOT of things...

Ultimately, everyone else has to be able to succeed as a complete player, defense, ball handling, etc...I'm not sure having a specialist is leading to optimal results long term, and it may ultimately hinder the development of players that could make us a more well rounded team

It's great Buddy can pour in 25 points in the second half, but in the first half, we get a huge negative. We still survived. At the same time, we never really find out what Braswell or Goodine, or others may be able to learn/develop from taking more of those minutes, or even just by shaking up the lineup.

We likely won't - because they're being assessed as players, not as specialists. Specialists aren't designed to play 30-40 minutes, but we got one doing that. I don't know...seems like we're just digging a hole and then hiding in it because it's comfortable. At the same time, I have no idea if playing those other guys leads to anything...…..so it's all just speculative, other than, I kinda hate that we have a shooting guard that isn't really good at much of anything other than shooting.

 

[Newhouser]

Not that relevant, either.

Blake Griffin got his, as expected. What the game plan didn't call for was the 9-point-per-game guard dropping 28 as Flynn and Devendorf wandered around up top with their hands at their sides. That was the difference in that game.

I'm kind of surprised that anyone who watched the game doesn't share that memory.

My lasting memory of that was Flynn (when we needed points trying to make it competitive) passed up an easy lay up and missed a showtime dunk. Flynn was great here on O but I always thought this defensive genius was a bit of a myth that grows every year he is gone. Had the tools, but didn't seem to always show the want on the defensive side.