College hoops is getting really hard to watch

[armory]

It was Burger King, no? I was very young at the time, but I seem to remember it being BK.

Possibly. Was kinda young myself, back when I never really knew the difference. Taste was not important, only the toy in the box.

 

[Knicks411]

I think it's very easy to see, especially if you watch SU hoops. The guys who come to SU believe that their superior athletic ability will allow them to get any rebound they want without ever putting a body on an offensive player. Except now that they are playing on the high D1 level, they aren't the best athletes anymore. Kris Joseph did this - Donte Greene - and now Jerami Grant to some extent.

But we'd need to go back and watch lots of games from 20 or 30 years ago to determine if it's any different.

In general, like I said, I'm always skeptical of any "it was better back in the day" argument. It doesn't mean it's not true, as I said, but people will be saying that stuff until the end of time. In 30 years we will be saying players don't have the fundamentals they did in 2013.

 

[armory]

But we'd need to go back and watch lots of games from 20 years ago to determine if it's any different.

In general, like I said, I'm always skeptical of any "it was better back in the day" argument. It doesn't mean it's not true, as I said, but people will be saying that stuff until the end of time. In 30 years we will be saying players don't have the fundamentals they did in 2013.

It's not hard to go back and check measurements. It's no secret that today's players are much taller, much more massive than they used to be. Same in all sports. That type of size is easily exploited before getting to college ball.

 

[Knicks411]

It's not hard to go back and check measurements. It's no secret that today's players are much taller, much more massive than they used to be. Same in all sports.

Not disputing that. But that doesn't mean they necessarily have worst fundamentals.

 

[OttoMets]

i've been feeling this way for a few years, but it really seems like it's picking up m ore steam from the general fanbase. That's a good thing; maybe we can actually start to do something about it. Shorten the shot clock, and call the game tighter.

Yeah, things started to slide in the late-'90s and the game got really ugly around 2004 or 2005 (Syracuse went from taking an annual thug loss to Pittsburgh to facing a distinct disadvantage against half a dozen teams; Seton Hall abused McNamara and Connecticut and Boston College roughed up Warrick). It's worse today.

Didn't have much company on this bandwagon until Bilas became more vocal about it this season.

 

[pfister1]

Yes it was BK. I remember the chants of "We want Fries" ringing loudly in the dome back in he day,

I would swear it was McDonalds, I thought I remember redeeming at the McDonald's on Crouse Ave. after a 100 point game. Any chance it was McDonalds early on and then flipped to BK?

 

[Fly Rodder]

This has to be fixed. I would like to see the football or baseball rules adopted - if you go, stay three years. If you can go straight to the NBA because you are actually the next Lebron, have at it.

And if nothing else, the NBA is making the colleges dance with the NCAA's APR requirements. Hot shot players get to campus and figure they're gone by spring and it's the coaching staff's problem, not the NBA's or NCAA's.

 

[armory]

Not disputing that. But that doesn't mean they necessarily have worst fundamentals.

Still a sound theory. Look at how well Anthony Davis shot & handled the ball for someone that is 6'11''. Essentially everyone - himself included - attributes that to being much shorter growing up, having to play like a guard, then having a huge late growth spurt. When physically outmatching players its easy to ignore fundamentals.

 

[Marsh01]

I would swear it was McDonalds, I thought I remember redeeming at the McDonald's on Crouse Ave. after a 100 point game. Any chance it was McDonalds early on and then flipped to BK?

Could have flipped. I am almost 100% sure it was BK at one point.

 

[Knicks411]

Still a sound theory. Look at how well Anthony Davis shot & handled the ball for someone that is 6'11''. Essentially everyone - himself included - attributes that to being much shorter growing up, having to play like a guard, then having a huge late growth spurt. When physically outmatching players its easy to ignore fundamentals.

But the players on average are bigger now, so you need to be taller and bigger in 2013 than you did in 1983 (to pick a year) in order to physically outmatch your competition. I don't think I follow the argument in this case. Certainly we expect guards to have better ball handling skills since they are expected to handle the ball more, I'm not going to dispute that. But wouldn't the argument be Davis wouldn't have handled the ball that well since fundamentals aren't taught as much now?

Like I said, maybe I'm just misinterpreting what you're saying here, so I'll stop talking

Yeah, things started to slide in the late-'90s and the game got really ugly around 2004 or 2005 (Syracuse went from taking an annual thug loss to Pittsburgh to facing a distinct disadvantage against half a dozen teams; Seton Hall abused McNamara and Connecticut and Boston College roughed up Warrick). It's worse today.

Didn't have much company on this bandwagon until Bilas became more vocal about it this season.

And I just wanted to say, I think we benefit from this as well. Maybe not as much as other teams that won't be named here, but we get a ton of blocks when the zone collapses on the baseline guy and there seems to be an awful lot of contact.

 

[OttoMets]

I'm not questioning the talent level. Clearly its as good as it ever has been. I lost interest when guys started going right from HS to the pros. It hurt the college game and upset me enough where I just tuned it out. When a team won an NBA championship back to me it seemed to mean more than it does today. I mean if you are a Celts fan did the title they won a couple of years ago mean as much as when Bird, Parish and McHale were winning them? I dont know. I love the passion and excitement of the college game. I love the students rushing the court. I love the pre-conference tournaments. I love the conference battles. I love championship week. I love the tournament. The NBA is just one long boring season that the switch flips come playoff time.

I agree with all of that.

But college basketball is also killing itself.

 

[Marsh01]

I agree with all of that.

But college basketball is also killing itself.

I can see that side of the argument.

 

[armory]

But the players on average are bigger now, so you need to be taller and bigger in 2013 than you did in 1983 (to pick a year) in order to physically outmatch your competition. I don't think I follow the argument in this case. Certainly we expect guards to have better ball handling skills since they are expected to handle the ball more, I'm not going to dispute that. But wouldn't the argument be Davis wouldn't have handled the ball that well since fundamentals aren't taught as much now?

The average size of high school players hasn't changed much though. Humans are still about the same height as they were 50 years ago. It's just that the player pool is bigger, the incentives have gotten MUCH bigger, and the height at which players are filtered out in recruiting got taller as a result.

Also, tall players don't usually put on much mass or bulk until college. You don't have to box out 240 lb centers in high school.

 

[Knicks411]

The average size of high school players hasn't changed much though. Humans are still about the same height as they were 50 years ago. It's just that the player pool is bigger, the incentives have gotten MUCH bigger, and the height at which players are filtered out in recruiting got taller as a result.

Interesting, so the idea is that growing up the players are bigger, relative to the average, than they were in the past, resulting in less of a need for fundamentals.

I have no idea if the math backs that up but i can buy the theory

 

[SoBeCuse]

Chris Brousard is filling in on SVP and Russilo and just went off about the fact that no offenses are run through the bigs anymore in college ball. He also said most offenses are designed nowadays for isolation and there just aren't any really good iso players (ala Derrick Rose) who can execute that type of offense in college because if you could do that, you'd leave after your first year and go pro.

Interesting. He's right it seems.

 

[armory]

It's the same dependence "crutch" theory applicable to all sorts of contexts. Example: I played youth soccer as a kid and remember this one beast of a kid that was twice the size of anyone else and had a cannon for a leg at his age. He used to score all the time purely because he could kick a ball really hard. Players would run out of the way to avoid his shots, goalies would cover their heads, kids actually quit the sport because of him. He was indisputably the best player in our age group and won games by himself.

After about 3-4 years we all grew up while he remained around the same size, then we could all shoot as hard him. He turned out to be one of the worst players on any team, had no ball skills, no concept of passing or getting open because he never had to bother with any of that nonsense. He quit the game not long after. I think it's a pretty common theme, especially in younger youth sports around adolescence; the best players as adults often were very short players when learning the game, then had very late, very substantial growth spurts.

Most already know this, but this was the case for MCW too. He didn't grow to 6'6'' until late in HS.

 

[Zelda Zonk]

Could have flipped. I am almost 100% sure it was BK at one point.

BK sounds more like it, but i'm sketchy, too. Seems like i would have actually redeemed the offer if it had been McDs and not BK.

 

[BuffOrange]

I still watch a lot but man is it taxing.

The moving screens are horrid and the whole basis of many programs offense. The constant slapping and bumbing with little to no calls. The scrum on every loose ball or rebound. Getting the block charge call wrong 95% of the time. UGLY

I actually think just calling the charge/block a block 90% of the time this year is the one thing they've done right and resulted in less flopping (as opposed to the 40/60 of recent years that resulted in so many ridiculous charging calls).

Obviously making these %'s up but I can't be the only one who has noticed this? I haven't heard anyone mention it was a point of emphasis this past offseason but I imagine it had to be.

Otherwise I pretty much agree with the sentiments itt. Need to shorten the shot clock. A lot of brutal games. Not even that interested in watching Uconn lose unless it's a McDonough/Bilas/Raftery game.

 

[Madbiker]

They were actually talking about this during the Knicks game last night and once they pointed out how players just get mauled on the perimeter in college basketball (bumping/hand checking) you really noticed how players actually guard in the NBA. They dont bump, slap, tackle players, they move their feet and stay in front of them. I never knew how noticeable it was until it was brought up last night and I started paying attention to the difference in the pro game.

Nobody in the NBA plays any defense until the playoffs so you can't really judge by regular season games. If guys had to play defense in the regular season they'd never make it through the long NBA season. College and NBA are very different games. Outside of the top 10-15 teams in college they can't play the NBA style because the players don't have that level of skill even for those teams it's only 2-3 players. Part of the appeal of college is the variety of playing styles and the interesting matchups that creates. I agree that I hate watching college teams that play slow half court, but if they don't have the talent to match up they have to do that to have any chance. If college had a 24 second clock the 8 -10 elite teams with all the talent would never lose except when they play each other.

 

[CusefanATL]

LOL, yes that has been covered page 2 I believe.

ha... more like page 1!

 

[MyMeloMyMan]

But we'd need to go back and watch lots of games from 20 or 30 years ago to determine if it's any different.

In general, like I said, I'm always skeptical of any "it was better back in the day" argument. It doesn't mean it's not true, as I said, but people will be saying that stuff until the end of time. In 30 years we will be saying players don't have the fundamentals they did in 2013.

It's a story as old as time. Guys get older and their favorite players retire or their fave teams aren't doing well...and they drift away from watching the game...so they just say, "Well, the game isn't as good as it used to be."

The NBA is better than ever..and I've been watching feverishly since about 1983.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

I think it started with Mikan and Wilt, and they'd just literally camp out under the basket (the lane was like half the size it was then) and dump buckets in. I guess, obviously before my time.

As for the NBA; I don't think anyone is saying it's pefect, of course it isn't. KG fouls all the time, moving screens, just grabs people, etc, and it's not just him. But the game is more aesthetically pleasing to me than college, both because the players are better and also because it's more wide open.



There is something to his, probably. The season is so long, there is so much traveling (to games, not with the ball, though that also) that its inevitable you'll see some of that. Also the scouting is so intense and deep that everyone pretty much knows what the other team runs.

As for the mid-range thing; I've mentioned it before, but it really isn't a high percentage shot. Even at the NBA level, with the best shooters in the world, the average on 10-15 foot shots is 42%. 16-23 feet is 38%. It just doesn't make sense to take a lot of those shots. The league shoots 64% at the rim, and 54% on an effective basis from 3. Why would you try to get more 40% shots at the expense of 54% shots?

There's a place for midrange shots, to open up the floor, make the defense guard everywhere, but they shouldn't be a staple of any offense. Very few guys are good enough to make it worth it. (Kevin Durant is 64% from 10-15 feet this year. He's obviously a freak)

Don't you think part of the reason for the lower percentages from mid range is simply the fact they don't do it very often. Most guys shoot threes in warm-ups (shooters I mean) instead of the closer to the hoop shots. There is also something to be said for the muscle memory you get shooting from three all the time that you don't have with all the varied mid-range shots. I know a Bosnian guy up here who shoots 3s like they are layups (we actually call them Bosnian layups) but has a ton of trouble inside the line.

 

[Knicks411]

Don't you think part of the reason for the lower percentages from mid range is simply the fact they don't do it very often. Most guys shoot threes in warm-ups (shooters I mean) instead of the closer to the hoop shots. There is also something to be said for the muscle memory you get shooting from three all the time that you don't have with all the varied mid-range shots. I know a Bosnian guy up here who shoots 3s like they are layups (we actually call them Bosnian layups) but has a ton of trouble inside the line.

To an extent, perhaps, but also I think the further away from the basket you are, the harder it is to shoot. Here are the percentages

at the rim: 64.5%
3-9 feet: 38.7%
10-15 feet: 42%
16-23 feet: 38%
23+: 35% (effective FG% of 54%)

To me, that's kind of what I would expect. You shoot the best at the rim, and the worst from 3, but you get the extra point from 3 so that makes it worth it. I am a little surprised that the 3-9 foot shot is about the same as the 16-23, and the 10-15 is better than either though. That seems to be consistent over the last few years.

What do you think people are going to shoot from midrange? I wouldn't expect them to shoot as well as they do at the rim, and I wouldn't expect them to shoot 54%, like the effective FG% on 3's is. I just don't think it's realistic to expect people to be able to shoot all that effectively from mid range. 2 guys in the league last year who took any kind of a serious number of shots from 16-23 feet made over 50% of them. Dirk and Al Horford (!). If the league shoots roughly 40%, could you work on it and bump it up to 42 or 43%? Maybe, maybe not. But that's still not anywhere near as efficient as the rim or behind the line. If the best guys in the league still can't shoot it as efficiently as they can from at the rim or from 3, I feel like that tells you what you need to know. There is always a place for mid range shots, and there are some guys who can make it worth it, but most of the time, they are lower percentage shots than the other spots on the floor.

 

[OrangeDW]

I'm personally getting to the point where if Syracuse isn't playing I can't stand watching college basketball . Seriously, I was channel surfing the other night and the most entertaining game by far was the Knicks game. I'm setting really sick of these 52 to 46 games. It used to be that only Pitt and Butler played that way. Now, apparently there is no such thing as fouling an opposing player if he's not in the act of shooting. And don't get me started on moving picks!! Wasn't that a point of emphasis just a couple years ago?? What the hell. They are ruining the best of all sports

Agreed, I've been at this point for a few years now. Between the flopping/undercutting when someone goes to the hoop, and all of the hacking/grabbing, I watch way less college hoops than I used to.

The NBA has been a lot more entertaining to watch for a few years now, to me.

 

[OrangeDW]

You guys who keep talking about the beautiful play of the NBA need to go look at that Ron Artest video posted the other day and tell me exactly how that is different than college ball. Metta (who was on offense) literally hugged his man, pushed him in towards the basket so that he could get any offensive board, and then took a swing underneath. Please.

And they may allow for guys to move about on the outside, but there are fouls underneath on every play. I watch Celts games occasionally, and Garnett has his hands on the guy he is defending pushing him before the ball even crosses halfcourt.

Was this the play where he got a flagrant foul and earned a suspension?

If he played for Butler it would be a no call. They had a kid german suplex Kris Joseph right in front of the refs, with no call!