Cooney

[OttoMets]

I can't remember such visceral hatred for an SU athlete with such over the top criticism than we've had for TC. Only one that comes close is Troy Nunes. Fab Melo was useless, is still hurting us and is a bad person and he hasn't received a fraction of the criticism that Cooney does on a daily basis.

There is valid criticism, but there is also group of usual suspects that have pathetically attacked him from day one. Unfortunately those offering legitimate criticism get drowned out and lumped together with the agenda driven posts.

The collapse at the end of the year was a full team effort, yet this small but loud group of fools puts the blame on TC. It is pathetic.

Scoop took way more criticism than Cooney. And a lot of that was less fair and considerably more personal.

 

[RF2044]

Scoop took way more criticism than Cooney. And a lot of that was less fair and considerably more personal.

I don't know about that [it being more].

I think that the level of nitpicky criticism is fairly consistent most years, it's only the focus that changes.

 

[OttoMets]

...Many of those posters seem congenitally incapable of acknowledging that 12 points per game is really freaking pretty solid by any objective standard in their zeal to label him a D2 player and throw a temper tantrum every time he misses a shot.

He's obviously a Division I player; there are like 3 posters who say otherwise and everyone here recognizes that they've pretty much spun off this Earth.

Objective standards...I dunno, for sophomore off guards, Cooney played about the same number of minutes as Devendorf (about two fewer points per game, similar percentages, much better defense, much worse distributor) and Triche (a hair better in most categories). With 200 more minutes than Waiters, Cooney scored half a point less per game, shot better from three, much worse from the field, distributed the ball worse, and defended better.

"Solid" and the like are difficult to quantify. As a Syracuse shooting guard, it seems that Cooney's offensive production is behind that of his recent peers. Going forward, I think everyone could agree that -- absent some spectacular production from elsewhere on the floor -- the team really needs better than 12 points on 10 attempts (at 40%) with few free throw attempts and little ball-handling or distribution from the two guard spot.

A tiny minority of posters wants to say absurd and kind of rude things. The rest is just reasonable basketball discussion.

 

[Jamesvillecuse]

This board is full of bullies. Reminds me of the first episode of Breaking Bad, when Walt's kid was trying on his pants.

its easy to be a tough guy on the internet

 

[CaptainJ]

I don't know about that [it being more].

I think that the level of nitpicky criticism is fairly consistent most years, it's only the focus that changes.

JB usually has a whipping boy, and possibly we unconsciously model him, even though our choices differ?

 

[OttoMets]

I don't know about that [it being more].

I think that the level of nitpicky criticism is fairly consistent most years, it's only the focus that changes.

Difficult to prove, but I remember it being worse for Scoop than anyone. Probably in part because he was a good player who I liked and a number of people spent years making up stupid nicknames and inventing ridiculous complaints that bore little relation to what we were watching on the court.

But there do seem to be a handful who find a kid they don't like and ride that theme consistently. It's important to distinguish between our biases (which shouldn't be shared) and basketball-related observations/criticism, which ought to remain as objective as possible.

 

[CaptainJ]

its easy to be a tough guy on the internet

 

[RF2044]

He's obviously a Division I player; there are like 3 posters who say otherwise and everyone here recognizes that they've pretty much spun off this Earth.

Objective standards...I dunno, for sophomore off guards, Cooney played about the same number of minutes as Devendorf (about two fewer points per game, similar percentages, much better defense, much worse distributor) and Triche (a hair better in most categories). With 200 more minutes than Waiters, Cooney scored half a point less per game, shot better from three, much worse from the field, distributed the ball worse, and defended better.

"Solid" and the like are difficult to quantify. As a Syracuse shooting guard, it seems that Cooney's offensive production is behind that of his recent peers. Going forward, I think everyone could agree that -- absent some spectacular production from elsewhere on the floor -- the team really needs better than 12 points on 10 attempts (at 40%) with few free throw attempts and little ball-handling or distribution from the two guard spot.

A tiny minority of posters wants to say absurd and kind of rude things. The rest is just reasonable basketball discussion.

OttoMets, I want to be clear--I have no issue whatsoever with people critiquing performance or discussing player skill limitations, etc. objectively. In my opinion, that is what a discussion board is for, and those type of discussions are completely in bounds. It's the personal attacks, lack of perspective, and polarizing pro- or anti-player bias that gets mixed into the "analysis" that bother me. As does some posters actively rooting for certain players ON OUR TEAM to fail.

I'll also disagree with you slightly on two points you make above. First of all, Dion Waiters--the #4 pick in the NBA draft--should not be the standard of comparison to hold Cooney against for the obvious reasons. Secondly, I don't agree with the notion that a double figure scorer is somehow subpar. Cooney has solid numbers, its the consistency that's lacking. For some reason, this forum looks down their nose at role players and undervalue them, ignoring the fact that 12 ppg in a conference like the ACC is pretty damn good. Its as though some posters go out of their way to cut off their nose to spite their face to express the complaint that 12 points per game isn't as good as 16 [for the record, I'm not accusing you of this specifically ottomets, just making a general observation about a faction on the board].

What Cooney needs to do is shoot for a consistently higher percentage, and hopefully diversify his offensive game a little more. The problem isn't that he is scoring 12 verus 14 versus 10 -- it's that he is streaky. And frankly, I couldn't care less how many points he scores, so long as the team's offensive identity evolves, he fits into whatever it ends up being, and we win games. Wringing our hands becaue he scored a fraction of a ppg lower than Triche [just borrowing from your example] and two points less than Devendorf, who is one of the more dynamic scorers in program history, isn't a very compelling issue to worry about. Talking about his streakiness / inconsistency is a more relevant thing to focus upon.

 

[arrow2arinzesknee]

Cooney is one of my favorite players to root for, not sure why so many rag on him, he always plays hard and is capable of carrying a team on an off night ie Notre Dame game last year.

I actually think the notre Dame game was the worst thing to happen to us last year, as defenses clearly made life more difficult on him as the rest of the team didn't evolve offensively .

Look he was a sophmore last year who was playing his first meaningful minutes and still has 12 points a game, he has a ton of potential and the second whole half of his story has yet to be written , let's give him a break and see what he can do

 

[orange2win]

I think the problem stems from TC coming in as the likely reincarnation of Jimmy Lee (50% shooter). We quickly found he is no Jimmy Lee. He also lacks the GMac overdrive gear that we could count on in big games. He is a streaky shooter. When he's hot, we all love him.

I still think he will be no problem this year. When he is having one of his slow days, JB simply yanks him for Patterson and hopefully all will be good. It is only a problem if JB sticks to his old time, rigid, seniority (hierarchy) "rule". If you have been around for a while, you know what I mean.

 

[AZOrange]

So sad when a thread flies over someone's head. Perhaps like a stealthy owl.

like a stealthy owl please poop on his head

 

[AZOrange]

Craig Forth comes to mind. The abuse he got here 10 years ago was unbearable to read. And the kid was a starter on a National Championship team...and a three-time Academic All-American! In spite of the abuse he took here, he has become a very giving alum who participates in SU events whenever asked (including being the School of Ed's commencement speaker last May).

Or Gmac or rautins.

 

[AZOrange]

Scoop took way more criticism than Cooney. And a lot of that was less fair and considerably more personal.

Scoop had his dingbat moments on and off the court. Cooney hasn't had half of that and deserves none of the vitriol

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

You can generally tell the posters who never played or don't really know basketball by the tenor and veracity of their criticisms of a player. Those who know the least complain the most and the loudest.

 

[jordoo]

What Cooney needs to do is shoot for a consistently higher percentage, and hopefully diversify his offensive game a little more. The problem isn't that he is scoring 12 verus 14 versus 10 -- it's that he is streaky. And frankly, I couldn't care less how many points he scores, so long as the team's offensive identity evolves, he fits into whatever it ends up being, and we win games. Wringing our hands becaue he scored a fraction of a ppg lower than Triche [just borrowing from your example] and two points less than Devendorf, who is one of the more dynamic scorers in program history, isn't a very compelling issue to worry about. Talking about his streakiness / inconsistency is a more relevant thing to focus upon.

Exactly.

 

[djcon57]

OttoMets, I want to be clear--I have no issue whatsoever with people critiquing performance or discussing player skill limitations, etc. objectively. In my opinion, that is what a discussion board is for, and those type of discussions are completely in bounds. It's the personal attacks, lack of perspective, and polarizing pro- or anti-player bias that gets mixed into the "analysis" that bother me. As does some posters actively rooting for certain players ON OUR TEAM to fail.

I'll also disagree with you slightly on two points you make above. First of all, Dion Waiters--the #4 pick in the NBA draft--should not be the standard of comparison to hold Cooney against for the obvious reasons. Secondly, I don't agree with the notion that a double figure scorer is somehow subpar. Cooney has solid numbers, its the consistency that's lacking. For some reason, this forum looks down their nose at role players and undervalue them, ignoring the fact that 12 ppg in a conference like the ACC is pretty damn good. Its as though some posters go out of their way to cut off their nose to spite their face to express the complaint that 12 points per game isn't as good as 16 [for the record, I'm not accusing you of this specifically ottomets, just making a general observation about a faction on the board].

What Cooney needs to do is shoot for a consistently higher percentage, and hopefully diversify his offensive game a little more. The problem isn't that he is scoring 12 verus 14 versus 10 -- it's that he is streaky. And frankly, I couldn't care less how many points he scores, so long as the team's offensive identity evolves, he fits into whatever it ends up being, and we win games. Wringing our hands becaue he scored a fraction of a ppg lower than Triche [just borrowing from your example] and two points less than Devendorf, who is one of the more dynamic scorers in program history, isn't a very compelling issue to worry about. Talking about his streakiness / inconsistency is a more relevant thing to focus upon.

This is a great post.

I think what's occurring is the extremes on both sites are framing the debate for the rest of us. "Cooney is D2" is bull-ish. People that actually think that should be deemed invalid.

But there has to be something in between for those of us to believe Cooney would be worth more to the team playing 25-30 mins a night vs 38-40. IMO, that's the debate.

 

[rrlbees]

This is a great post. I think what's occurring is the extremes on both sites are framing the debate for the rest of us. "Cooney is D2" is bull-ish. People that actually think that should be deemed invalid. But there has to be something in between for those of us to believe Cooney would be worth more to the team playing 25-30 mins a night vs 38-40. IMO, that's the debate.

The extreme is on one side. I haven't seen anyone claim he is an AA or the greatest thing since sliced bread. I see several saying the total opposite.

 

[djcon57]

The extreme is on one side. I haven't seen anyone claim he is an AA or the greatest thing since sliced bread. I see several saying the total opposite.

The people saying other teams schemed their defense around him were/are extreme.

I understand you won't agree with that...and that's ok. We can agree to disagree.

 

[Cusefan0307]

The people saying other teams schemed their defense around him were/are extreme.

I understand you won't agree with that...and that's ok. We can agree to disagree.

How Syracuse was defended in 13-14:

Faceguard Cooney because he won't go inside.
Force CJ Right or make him shoot contested Jumpers.
Pack it in against Grant cause he can't shoot. Don't guard him outside of 12 feet. Sit on his spin move to the left.
Play Rak straight up because he wasn't a huge threat. Don't guard him outside of five feet.
Keep Ennis out of the lane and make him shoot contested jumpers because he has a slow release.

EDIT: Our players last year really were not complimentary of each other. Cooney had nobody to help with outside shooting. Grant and Roc were both ineffective outside the paint. CJ's jumper was missing all year, and you really didn't have to worry about coming out on tyler because his release was so slow. The effect of this was even though trevors guy was in his face, it still made it difficult for Ennis or Fair to drive because ROC and Grant's man was always packing it in. Trevor's man never was required to help off because we had no post threat.

The good news it's a year later. I think the guys we have this year are more complimentary of each other. CMAC is much more diversified offensively than Grant ever was. When silent G comes in the game, I believe he will provide more of an outside threat than CJ did last year. We know Joseph has more explosiveness than ennis, and Roc has improved. Will the changes around him, help trevor have a better year?

 

[Jamesvillecuse]

I saw people say defenses paid extra attention to him don't recall anyone saying they schemed their defense around him

 

[RF2044]

The people saying other teams schemed their defense around him were/are extreme.

I understand you won't agree with that...and that's ok. We can agree to disagree.

I saw people say defenses paid extra attention to him don't recall anyone saying they schemed their defense around him

Agreed. I'm not sure what "other teams schemed their defense around him" exactly means, and I don't want to split hairs trying to interpret. But when you strip away the subjectivity, the notion that other teams did not make a concerted defensive effort to overplay Cooney to take away the three point shot is patently false.

 

[Jamesvillecuse]

Agreed. I'm not sure what "other teams schemed their defense around him" exactly means, and I don't want to split hairs trying to interpret. But when you strip away the subjectivity, the notion that other teams did not structure their defenses to overplay Cooney to take away the three point shot is patently false.

I agree when you only have one 3 point threat teams are going to over play that threat. Teams did play a box and 1 on Cooney too but if he were such a scrub teams would not of paid this attention to him. He was a product of poor recruiting by JB by not having other shooters. Going forward the recruiting has obviously fixed that problem. I am just saying lets let the season play out

 

[djcon57]

Agreed. I'm not sure what "other teams schemed their defense around him" exactly means, and I don't want to split hairs trying to interpret. But when you strip away the subjectivity, the notion that other teams did not structure their defenses to overplay Cooney to take away the three point shot is patently false.

I'm not suggesting teams didn't coach the man defending Cooney to overplay him.

I'm suggesting the inference in some posts that other teams #1 goal was to stop Cooney from getting open looks, which was and has been suggested, is false.

I'm suggesting that Cooney being on the floor and running in circles for 40 mins was somehow beneficial to our offense last year is a joke.

 

[RF2044]

I'm not suggesting teams didn't coach the man defending Cooney to overplay him.

I'm suggesting the inference in some posts that other teams #1 goal was to stop Cooney from getting open looks, which was and has been suggested, is false.

I'm suggesting that Cooney being on the floor and running in circles for 40 mins was somehow beneficial to our offense last year is a joke.

Sounds to me like inferred vs. implied confusion. I don't recall a single post claiming that the #1 goal was what you write above.

But I have seen a lot of knowledgeable posters--including both coaches and former players--who have debunked the notion that overplaying Cooney wasn't a concerted focal point of opposing defenses. Suggesting otherwise is completely false. So... if people want to fall back on subjectively interpreting "overplay" to mean that it was the other team's #1 goal and that it requries constant double teaming instead of what was actually being implied, then I can understand why many seem to be confused. But this highlights for me that the posters who don't have a grasp of foundational defensive concepts or don't recognize what the other team is doing defensively away from the ball really ought to stop arguing about X's and O's.

 

[Jamesvillecuse]

so you are saying teams wanted Cooney to have open looks?