Buddy's game

[Ghost]

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.

Ooooooooooooh, I think I remember that!

 

[NineOneSeven]

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

That's good stuff

 

[OttoMets]

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.

It was juuuuust out of reach but we were keeping it interesting (after getting down big early due to Mr. Crocker's career performance). The lane opened up for Flynn, he bricked the dunk, and Griffin immediately put someone on a poster at the other end (IIRC, because Flynn's drive had left SU unbalanced and nobody rotated back on defense).

Same deal with the dunk attempt as with the defense - all the tools, but not the discipline.

 

[FrancoPizza]

this made me laugh alot for some reason

It's funny because it's 100% true.

well, almost. washington can offer this too. without the smell of rotting fish.

 

[kirbivore]

I shared this optimism, he seems to have some solid intangibles and has occasionally shown a well-rounded offensive game, but I don't know. His misses are remarkable. What's the record for missed jumpers that jam themselves between the rim and backboard and result in a held ball? Halfway through the year, I think he already owns it.

Cooney was the all time leader in this

 

[shandeezy7]

Didn't read all of this thread, but wow do I think that there is a lot of misplaced blame being thrown onto Buddy here. Yes he has his defensive limitations and yes he can have stretches where his offensive game is baffling, but the reasons that we lost that game on Saturday had mostly nothing to do with Buddy. Basically all of the numbers were even (or we had a slight advantage) except for rebounds (including 13 offensive rebounds for Gtown to 5 for us) and fouls (partly officiating, partly our weak defense).

I'd say that yet again, our biggest problem is that we got big-boyed down low. There's a reason why we've been able to pretty easily handle every lower level team that we've played while getting manhandled by every P5 we've played (minus GTech). When your frontcourt is comprised of a converted SG and two forwards/centers that weigh less than most high-level high school big men, you're gonna have major issues. We have absolutely zero inside presence on either end of the court, and it forces our backcourt to do more than they should have to.

Buddy is averaging 15 ppg and shooting 39% from three on the year against a schedule in which half of the teams that we've played have been P5, and yet people on here are saying he should be playing for Colgate. Asinine. The past few years, everyone on here has been complaining that all we do is recruit guys for the zone who don't have any shooting ability. Now everyone is complaining that we have a kid that can shoot but isn't a great defender. Can't win.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Didn't read all of this thread, but wow do I think that there is a lot of misplaced blame being thrown onto Buddy here. Yes he has his defensive limitations and yes he can have stretches where his offensive game is baffling, but the reasons that we lost that game on Saturday had mostly nothing to do with Buddy. Basically all of the numbers were even (or we had a slight advantage) except for rebounds (including 13 offensive rebounds for Gtown to 5 for us) and fouls (partly officiating, partly our weak defense).

I'd say that yet again, our biggest problem is that we got big-boyed down low. There's a reason why we've been able to pretty easily handle every lower level team that we've played while getting manhandled by every P5 we've played (minus GTech). When your frontcourt is comprised of a converted SG and two forwards/centers that weigh less than most high-level high school big men, you're gonna have major issues. We have absolutely zero inside presence on either end of the court, and it forces our backcourt to do more than they should have to.

Buddy is averaging 15 ppg and shooting 39% from three on the year against a schedule in which half of the teams that we've played have been P5, and yet people on here are saying he should be playing for Colgate. Asinine. The past few years, everyone on here has been complaining that all we do is recruit guys for the zone who don't have any shooting ability. Now everyone is complaining that we have a kid that can shoot but isn't a great defender. Can't win.

I hear what you are saying, but Buddy could help out on those boards once in a while. Rebounds with the zone tend to be long, which is one of the reasons we give up so many offensive boards. Buddy could help out considering he is tall and in a position to get in there and grab the ones that come out toward the line/wing.

 

[orangecuse]

Didn't read all of this thread, but wow do I think that there is a lot of misplaced blame being thrown onto Buddy here. Yes he has his defensive limitations and yes he can have stretches where his offensive game is baffling, but the reasons that we lost that game on Saturday had mostly nothing to do with Buddy. Basically all of the numbers were even (or we had a slight advantage) except for rebounds (including 13 offensive rebounds for Gtown to 5 for us) and fouls (partly officiating, partly our weak defense).

I'd say that yet again, our biggest problem is that we got big-boyed down low. There's a reason why we've been able to pretty easily handle every lower level team that we've played while getting manhandled by every P5 we've played (minus GTech). When your frontcourt is comprised of a converted SG and two forwards/centers that weigh less than most high-level high school big men, you're gonna have major issues. We have absolutely zero inside presence on either end of the court, and it forces our backcourt to do more than they should have to.

Buddy is averaging 15 ppg and shooting 39% from three on the year against a schedule in which half of the teams that we've played have been P5, and yet people on here are saying he should be playing for Colgate. Asinine. The past few years, everyone on here has been complaining that all we do is recruit guys for the zone who don't have any shooting ability. Now everyone is complaining that we have a kid that can shoot but isn't a great defender. Can't win.

Yeah, it's usually never a good idea to cut off your nose to spite your face.

 

[shandeezy7]

I hear what you are saying, but Buddy could help out on those boards once in a while. Rebounds with the zone tend to be long, which is one of the reasons we give up so many offensive boards. Buddy could help out considering he is tall and in a position to get in there and grab the ones that come out toward the line/wing.

Don't disagree there, but there's a difference between saying we need him to help out on the boards more and be more aggressive on D versus saying he's the reason for all of our problems and he should be playing at Colgate. Even still, he's averaging close to 2 rebounds per game, and I don't see him ever being more than a 3 rpg guy, so it's probably not worth harping on. Devendorf's best year was 2.7 rpg. Rautins' was 3.4. Gerry's was 2.7. Flynn's was 2.7. As big and athletic as he was, Brandon Triche's was 3.4.

 

[tbonezone]

i don't worry too much about buddy's rebound stats. it's generally acknowledged the zone is a weak rebounding defense. (we all agree with that right ?) . buddy is generally going to be standing at or near the arc whenever a shot goes up offensively or defensively . that's his role. he's not going to crash the boards. he'll get the occasional long carom. i'm cool with that.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

i don't worry too much about buddy's rebound stats. it's generally acknowledged the zone is a weak rebounding defense. (we all agree with that right ?) . buddy is generally going to be standing at or near the arc whenever a shot goes up offensively or defensively . that's his role. he's not going to crash the boards. he'll get the occasional long carom. i'm cool with that.

Then don't complain about us getting outrebounded in the future.

 

[Ghost]

Buddy is averaging 15 ppg and shooting 39% from three on the year against a schedule in which half of the teams that we've played have been P5, and yet people on here are saying he should be playing for Colgate. Asinine. The past few years, everyone on here has been complaining that all we do is recruit guys for the zone who don't have any shooting ability. Now everyone is complaining that we have a kid that can shoot but isn't a great defender. Can't win.

I don't think the blame is being placed on Buddy so much as the roster, and perhaps his usage. Neither of which he determined, unless he's making decisions at the dinner table with his Father.

How many players averaging 2 or more threes per game are shooting 50% or above? Lots of them likely (100+????), and many of them should be on schools like Colgate, because, well, perhaps that's all they can do well.

So, that argument isn't really much. Buddy deserves to be on the team, he has a great shot, he's tall, but he's a specialist. If he wanted to be more than that at this stage he should be on Colgate.

Because on Colgate he could be more than that! He could be slashing to the rim and shooting fadeaway jumpers against his athletic equals!

On Syracuse, against P5 schools, he may have a night or two, but most likely, just a specialist...playing A LOT of minutes. Again, not his fault, but the players are the ones you examine, and when he's not hitting shots...……..well, we're in trouble because every other aspect of his game is a pretty notable liability for a SG at this level.

But not at Colgate.

I think that's likely the point people are going for...…..which isn't anti-Buddy, it's just sort of where we are, and it's frustrating to some. Again, definitely solid player, definitely belongs, but I think it's just more about the state of the program.

 

[orangecuse]

I don't think the blame is being placed on Buddy so much as the roster, and perhaps his usage. Neither of which he determined, unless he's making decisions at the dinner table with his Father.

How many players averaging 2 or more threes per game are shooting 50% or above? Lots of them likely (100+????), and many of them should be on schools like Colgate, because, well, perhaps that's all they can do well.

So, that argument isn't really much. Buddy deserves to be on the team, he has a great shot, he's tall, but he's a specialist. If he wanted to be more than that at this stage he should be on Colgate.

Because on Colgate he could be more than that! He could be slashing to the rim and shooting fadeaway jumpers against his athletic equals!

On Syracuse, against P5 schools, he may have a night or two, but most likely, just a specialist...playing A LOT of minutes. Again, not his fault, but the players are the ones you examine, and when he's not hitting shots...……..well, we're in trouble because every other aspect of his game is a pretty notable liability for a SG at this level.

But not at Colgate.

I think that's likely the point people are going for...…..which isn't anti-Buddy, it's just sort of where we are, and it's frustrating to some. Again, definitely solid player, definitely belongs, but I think it's just more about the state of the program.

 

[tbonezone]

Then don't complain about us getting outrebounded in the future.

you read and understand that the zone by it's very nature is a weak rebounding defense right ?
so when we stop playing zone only i'll stop complaining about the boarding.. but as i said i don't blame buddy. he spends the whole game patrolling the perimeter. the outer limits . parsecs from the rim. by design.