Do you think the 2-3 zone keeps the best recruits away from Syracuse? | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com
.

Do you think the 2-3 zone keeps the best recruits away from Syracuse?

We currently start 3 five star players.

So to answer your question, no. 99.9% of other schools would love to have the recruiting classes that SU has been bringing in lately.

And once you get past Kentucky, most of the uber-elite recruits are already off the board. I think this phenomenon has really hurt North Carolina immensely these past few years. Before Kentucky and Cal, they would get the uber-elite recruits.
 
Syracuse is currently 2nd tier elite, so the Orange tends to get 2nd tier elite prospects . . . it's got more to do with overall reputation than the 2-3 zone. as jimsonjunction noted, adding another title or two would do more for elevating the recruiting than changing defensive philosophy would.

but I want to note one thing:
Jeremy L. said:
I will also state right now that I am a big fan of the zone. It's worked for over 35 years.
Expand...
this is not accurate. JB did not begin playing mostly zone until the probation period in the early 90s, and didn't go totally zone until after the 96 Final Four run. So, it's been working more like 20 years and been excelling really only the last 4 (and counting)
 
So Syracuse is not the single best recruiting school in the country and you blame that on playing zone despite the fact that recruiting is better now that we are playing zone full time than it was when we were playing man to man full time? Seems like your reasoning is seriously flawed. There can only be one best school, Syracuse is not it, but we are in the top 1 or 2% of D1 schools in recruiting.
Expand...

No, I don't know if the blame is being put entirely on the zone or at all on the zone. The question was does playing the 2-3 zone keep the best recruits away. Our recruiting is awesome, but we don't typically get the elite of the elite. Which is fine, there are only so many schools that can get them and we've done pretty well without them. And I don't think the zone is really the reason. But we don't normally land top 5-10 caliber kids; I think that is a pretty fair statement to make.
 
cto said:
Syracuse in January... or Durham/Chapel Hill in January?

I suspect that's much more of a factor than what kind of defense a team plays.
Expand...
100,000,000% correct!
 
Zelda Zonk said:
• It's a matter of personal opinion as to how to characterize the differences in recruiting classes. You may consider us in the top 2% and find comfort and satisfaction in that. I, on the other hand, see that we're in a conference with Duke and NC, and they will regularly pull top 10 players. Each year. And, in multiples, per year. Heck, Duke regularly fields almost an entire squad of McD players. We're not doing that. That does not give me comfort or satisfaction. You may be a 'glass half full' kinda guy, and being better than 98-99% of other programs (i don't agree with your math, but whatever). I'm a 'glass half full — but of poison' kinda guy. And, all i see is the 2% ahead of us. I don't give a rat's about beating Colgate or Cornell, or Virginia or NC State. Winning those games won't compare to the order of magnitude of suck if/when we lose to Duke.
Expand...

Man, I mostly agree with your analysis but this is one hell of a depressing way to approach fandom. Being in the top 2% (or 3%? it's not clear to me exactly what percentile you want to slot SU in) is pretty awesome. SU is admittedly not the #1 program in the country. It never will be. Forcing yourself to suffer anew each day that fact is true doesn't strike me as a particularly fun way to go through life.
 
Knicks411 said:
No, I don't know if the blame is being put entirely on the zone or at all on the zone. The question was does playing the 2-3 zone keep the best recruits away. Our recruiting is awesome, but we don't typically get the elite of the elite. Which is fine, there are only so many schools that can get them and we've done pretty well without them. And I don't think the zone is really the reason. But we don't normally land top 5-10 caliber kids; I think that is a pretty fair statement to make.
Expand...

This seems like probably the right take. It would be a shock if there weren't some players who were scared off by the zone. They're 17-year old kids making a decision that is simultaneously momentous and inconsequential; just about anything could sway them.

At the same time, I don't think you can look at the costs in a vacuum. There are direct benefits - I suspect the zone has a positive impact on some kids (without having anything to base this on, MCW strikes me as a possibility). And there are indirect benefits - being a really good team has to be the single most important factor in recruiting, and at least recently the zone has been an important contributor to SU being a really good team. I also suspect that the novelty of the zone and JB's tight association with it (a Grantland writer today described SU's as the most famous defense in college basketball) brings some incremental press and attention as well.
 
Zelda Zonk said:
• It's a matter of personal opinion as to how to characterize the differences in recruiting classes. You may consider us in the top 2% and find comfort and satisfaction in that. I, on the other hand, see that we're in a conference with Duke and NC, and they will regularly pull top 10 players. Each year. And, in multiples, per year. Heck, Duke regularly fields almost an entire squad of McD players. We're not doing that. That does not give me comfort or satisfaction. You may be a 'glass half full' kinda guy, and being better than 98-99% of other programs (i don't agree with your math, but whatever). I'm a 'glass half full — but of poison' kinda guy. And, all i see is the 2% ahead of us. I don't give a rat's about beating Colgate or Cornell, or Virginia or NC State. Winning those games won't compare to the order of magnitude of suck if/when we lose to Duke.

• Having "at least one better recruiting class" also isn't comforting. It's good. But, we have to compete with great. And beating each of those teams once in five years, while fantastic, still means not beating them four out of five years. Again, the OP's question was about "the best."
Expand...
Duke may field an entire squad of McD players but they weren't in the final four last year. KU had the best class in the country last year and they lost in the first round of the NIT. We went to a final four. It seems like you're watching recruiting as if it's the actual game. JB has a history of finding players before they get big or players that have unrealized potential. I care more about what a guy does after he gets here than what he did in high school. MCW was a three star when he committed, became a lottery pick. Hakim Warrick was a fallback recruit barely in the top 100, became an All-American and a first round draft pick. GMac was not a McD, he drops 18 in the first half of the NC game while going up against a senior that's had a 10 year NBA career and follows that up with an epic performance against BYU in the NCAA tournament the following year and a legendary one in the Big East Tournament as a senior.

You cited our history as reason for us being good recruiters. All of the teams that you think we should be better than have more history than us. The blue bloods have history going back to the 50's. Ours really only goes back to the '80's (Bing was a blip and our first final four in '75 was considered a Cinderella run). As someone else said, we are second tier elite, and we recruit like it. Do I want us to recruit like the blue bloods? Sure. What I care more about is us being consistent contenders for final fours, and we have been as of late. I certainly prefer that to being a UCLA that can point to it's history but can't live up to it.

If ALL you see are the 2% ahead of us, you must be very sad much of the time. I see the 2% ahead of us AND the 98% behind us. That's called perspective.
 
We get our share of big time prospects. We do great job of finding gems for this program. Ask Indiana there class with Zeller was high ranked; we spanked them when it counted. I have not watch team that we can’t beat. Duke, Kentucky, MState will be a good game.
 
let's compare a couple of forwards from the 2010 recruiting class.

North Carolina got Harrison Barnes, the consensus #1 recruit in America. Behind him, North Carolina won 72% of their games and went to back to back Elite 8s . . .then he left

In the same class, Syracuse got forward CJ Fair, the consensus #96 player in America. Behind him, Syracuse has wan 82% of its games and has gone to back to back Elite 8s . . . and counting

now, you can be worried about recruit rankings if you wish, but I trust JB to go out and get the guys who are best suited to his system and then to make it work.
 
Would playing man to man make us a blue blood? Of course not. The same teams get the top 5 recruits every year, it's not because of what defense they play. It's because of their history and championships and final fours and legendary coaches that no other programs can match, including Syracuse. Last year was our first final four in 10 years, that's got more to do with not getting the uber recruits that the zone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I'll put this simply. Not wanting to play zone is probably 5th down the list of reasons recruits wouldn't want to play here.

1) Winter
2) Location. Central New York is not going to impress anybody. Yeah, we're in decent shape for some Philly/NYC kids but it's not like they can just hop over to Philly or NYC on a whim.
3) Being Boeheim'd. Top recruits don't always like the possibility, however small, of not being guaranteed a starting spot and 30+mpg as a Frosh.
4) Relative lack of NBA talents. Relative to the schools landing the elite dudes.
5) Playing zone. I'm not even confident this should be ranked.
 
moqui said:
let's compare a couple of forwards from the 2010 recruiting class.

North Carolina got Harrison Barnes, the consensus #1 recruit in America. Behind him, North Carolina won 72% of their games and went to back to back Elite 8s . . .then he left

In the same class, Syracuse got forward CJ Fair, the consensus #96 player in America. Behind him, Syracuse has wan 82% of its games and has gone to back to back Elite 8s . . . and counting

now, you can be worried about recruit rankings if you wish, but I trust JB to go out and get the guys who are best suited to his system and then to make it work.
Expand...
A few thoughts...
1. I guarantee other teams try to use the zone against us in recruiting. Not just for top kids, but for anyone. Doesn't seem to really work generally speaking though.
2. NBA scouts seem to talk about the zone as a negative when it comes to our guys, but at the end of the day they draft talent and figure they can coach guys up on the defensive end. We've had 4 guys picked in the top 6 overall in the last 10 years:, Melo, Flynn, Wes, Dion, seems to suggest that though NBA teams give lip service to being worried about the zone in the end it doesn't keep them from drafting our guys.
3. So to your point - does it hurt us with the VERY top recruits - the top 5 guys. Ehhh...I looked back to 2007 and we were only involved with 3 guys that fit that description - Nerlens, Anthony Davis, and Tobias Harris. As another poster mentioned all three of these kids exploded as Sr's - they weren't your Jabari Parker, everyone has known about you since you were 12, type of kid. It does seem like we don't really target those kids. Francis or others might have a better feel for this than I do, but it seems to me that JB thinks it is too much effort to go up against UK etc for a kid that you KNOW is only here for a year. Re the three guys we were involved in, I really don't know if the zone hurt. I'm sure Cal and others bring it up, so maybe it is one of many factors.
 
moqui said:
let's compare a couple of forwards from the 2010 recruiting class.

North Carolina got Harrison Barnes, the consensus #1 recruit in America. Behind him, North Carolina won 72% of their games and went to back to back Elite 8s . . .then he left

In the same class, Syracuse got forward CJ Fair, the consensus #96 player in America. Behind him, Syracuse has wan 82% of its games and has gone to back to back Elite 8s . . . and counting

now, you can be worried about recruit rankings if you wish, but I trust JB to go out and get the guys who are best suited to his system and then to make it work.
Expand...
I think in the last 6-7 years JB has done a much better job of recruiting only guys who would work in our system. You hardly even see a recruit now who you look at and wonder how they are going to fit into what we do (Coleman maybe). Pre 08 I think we were either a little less disciplined or maybe it was more just circumstances, but we ended up with more guys who were not great zone fits. Devo, Harris, Flynn, D Wright come to mind. Course the first 3 guys on that list were top 20 recruits...I guess we would probably take them now too.
 
The lack of proven one and dones (excl. Carmelo), whether due to talent (Xmas, Melo) or circumstance (MCW) is likely reason 1 or 1A why we don't get the very cream of the crop.
 
Unless my counting is off, Duke has only had four players (Deng, Irving, Rivers, and now Parker likely) leave after one year.

Kansas has had three (Henry, Selby and Wiggins)

In the last decade, I should say.
 
KU might have 2 more this year, with Embiid and Seldon, but I think in general you are correct.
 
PoppyHart said:
The lack of proven one and dones (excl. Carmelo), whether due to talent (Xmas, Melo) or circumstance (MCW) is likely reason 1 or 1A why we don't get the very cream of the crop.
Expand...

In regards to the lack of one and dones due to circumstance, I'd say this is a fair point. Especially when discussing top 5-10 ranked guard prospects, those guys all think they can & should be playing right away, year 1, with the goal of leaving asap for the NBA.

And when they see top 20 guard recruits like Dion Waiters (ESPN ranked #15 overall, #2 SG) and MCW (ESPN ranked #21 overall, #4 SG) not get many minutes at all in their 1st years - and, even worse (in their minds), sitting behind "just eh" type of talents like Scoop Jardine & Brandon Triche - well, I get a sense that these elite, top recruits don't even want to risk having that scenario play out. (No matter how well it ended up working out for Dion & MCW in the end.)

All they see is that after their 1st years of college, neither Dion or MCW could/would have been drafted in the first round (if they had left after that 1 year at SU) - and even though they both ended up as high 1st rounders after 2 years of school, I don't think that is a risk they are willing to take. (If seemingly better opportunities exist for immediate playing time at another high-end school.)
 
Henny & Coke said:
In regards to the lack of one and dones due to circumstance, I'd say this is a fair point. Especially when discussing top 5-10 ranked guard prospects, those guys all think they can & should be playing right away, year 1, with the goal of leaving asap for the NBA.

And when they see top 20 guard recruits like Dion Waiters (ESPN ranked #15 overall, #2 SG) and MCW (ESPN ranked #21 overall, #4 SG) not get many minutes at all in their 1st years - and, even worse (in their minds), sitting behind "just eh" type of talents like Scoop Jardine & Brandon Triche - well, I get a sense that these elite, top recruits don't even want to risk having that scenario play out. (No matter how well it ended up working out for Dion & MCW in the end.)

All they see is that after their 1st years of college, neither Dion or MCW could/would have been drafted in the first round (if they had left after that 1 year at SU) - and even though they both ended up as high 1st rounders after 2 years of school, I don't think that is a risk they are willing to take. (If seemingly better opportunities exist for immediate playing time at another high-end school.)
Expand...

Riding the bench for one year in college is one year of potential earning lost.
 
docsu said:
Unless my counting is off, Duke has only had four players (Deng, Irving, Rivers, and now Parker likely) leave after one year.

Kansas has had three (Henry, Selby and Wiggins)

In the last decade, I should say.
Expand...
Duke had Maggette but that was a long time ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
173,972
Messages
5,124,456
Members
6,086
Latest member
1776

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
219
Guests online
2,110
Total visitors
2,329
Totals may include hidden visitors.


...
Top Bottom