Fordham Thoughts

[General20]

I know a lot of people did not get a chance to see this game, so I will do my best to describe everything that happened.

Like Cornell, this was a game of two halves. So I want to break it down one half at a time.

Fordham is a small team that starts a four guard/one big line up with heights of 6'2, 6'3, 6'2, 6'3, 6'8. Given this fact, I think anybody on this board could have devised the strategy that Syracuse used, namely, bring our center out of the lane (by having him set a screen up high) and take Fordham's only big guy with him. Then throw the ball down low to Fair or Grant who enjoyed a five or six inch height advantage.

This strategy worked swimmingly. Fair put up 26 points and Grant had 16 (and could have had 20 or more had he made his free throws) while shooting a combined 52% from the field and 64% from around the basket (thank you syracuse.com shot charts!).

Syracuse kept going back to this strategy (as they tend to do when they find something that works). So Fair and Grant logged some pretty big minutes while everyone else (except Ennis who is our only point guard) pretty much rotated in and out like a revolving door. The bigs especially failed to put up first half stats because they were being taken (intentionally) far away from the action around the basket.

Sometimes small teams with multiple three point shooters can pull SU's zone out of shape, but our guys did a good job holding the form of the zone and as a result Fordham missed the first nine three point shots it took, made less than 29% of its total first half baskets, and went into halftime down 25.

Fordham ended the game shooting 11-27 (or 41%) from three. Considering they missed their first nine three point attempts I find this amazing, and I honestly can't think of another situation where I saw this happen.

You might ask yourself, what changed? The answer is, not much. Fordham didn't do anything different offensively - Severe, Thomas and Frazier took the majority of the first half threes that missed, and they took the majority of the second half threes that went in. The Syracuse zone continued to hold its shape in the second half as it did in the first half. Fordham did not enjoy excessive amounts of open threes or threes in transition. But yet their shots went in.

The explanation is that Fordham has a few guys who have a reputation for making difficult shots from deep and in this game they did just that, and that is going to happen from time to time.

On D, Fordham changed what they were doing and played most of the second half in a zone so we could not put one of their guards on an island against our forwards. Syracuse managed to find plenty of open shots against this zone, but didn't make many of them. Roberson and Johnson played together a lot during this part of the game (with Roberson at forward and Johnson at guard), and neither could find their shooting touch going a combined 0-9 from deep against Fordham's zone.

Fordham made contested threes, and Syracuse missed open three's, that is your explanation for why the lead got cut in the second half. In this situation, it really is that simple.

The good news that came from the second half is that our big guys got to go back under the basket where they proved capable of doing damage, helping Syracuse win the rebounding battle 49 to 29 and the offensive rebounding battle 22-7. Coleman starred in the rebounding department with seven offensive rebounds, and ten total rebounds (scoring ten points as well for a double double).

The biggest story of this game (and all of college basketball) is the officiating. The announcement before the season was that hand checking and flopping would be a "point of emphasis" this year. Every year there is a point of emphasis going into the season, but usually officials fall into old patterns and you don't notice a difference when the game gets going.

I watched a LOT of basketball yesterday, and I can tell you, this time there is a huge difference in the way games are being called. Almost every game was played in the 90's. The word has come down from on high . . . they want more scoring!

Remember what Tim Donaghy (the NBA official who admitted to fixing games for gambling purposes) said, its easier for an official to affect the over/under line, than it is to affect who wins the game. The officials have a BIG influence over how many points are scored in any given game, and now the officials are told to let points happen . . . and its working!

Just think of the point of emphasis itself - hand checking AND flopping. Those two things have nothing to do with each other. They are being brought together because they are the two biggest advantages defenses have over offenses, and now they are gone.

Personally I think these changes are for the best. College basketball had gotten horrendous to watch, because defenses were given every advantage. There is going to be an adjustment period while players learn what they can and cannot do now, but in the long run this represents a shift towards how basketball should be played.

You'd think Syracuse would be benefited by these rule changes, but I'm not so sure. Syracuse played in the ruthless Big East for a long time, and their zone is predicated on stopping guard penetration by any means necessarily. Syracuse did pretty darn well under the old rules. Under the new rules they are going to give up more points (but so are the teams they play) I will be interested in watching how easily people can drive the lane against our zone. Lets just say that if SU finds it hard to stop penetration, it would be a very bad thing for us.

I will say this, teams are no longer going to be able to rely on defensive stops. Limiting turnovers, rebounding well, and shooting well are going to play bigger roles. As far as that goes, having turnover free Ennis instead of defensive force MCW is probably in our best interest.

Individual player comments

Ennis - Big improvement over the first game. Ennis was effective on defense committing only 2 fouls compared to Cooney and Gbinije who each committed 4 despite playing far fewer minutes than Ennis. On offense he shot 10 free throws and made 8 which is going to be important for him this year.

Cooney - The only thing I really took from this is, he needs to keep his hands off of ballhandlers. He had two very nice steals and is good on defense otherwise. Cooney went 0-4 from three, and though I would have liked him to make one, it does not bother me at all. Most players follow great games with off games, and Cooney was not a big part of our gameplan, coming out early in the first half and not returning until very late in the first half so Boeheim could get good looks at Gbinije, Johnson, and Patterson.

Fair - Nothing bad to say here, Fair was asked to dominate, and did.

Christmas - Was not asked to do much in this game. He did generate 4 fouls which limited him a bit. But basically showed that he can keep up his aggressive play when asked to.

Coleman - The biggest thing is, he was always in the right position defensively and only committed two fouls. He also rebounded great. Right now offense is a labor for him, and he's not a difference maker at all on defense but he scored ten points and got ten rebounds and showed improvement.

Gbinije - Only played 11 minutes because of foul trouble, but in that 11 minutes he showed once again he is limited offensively but good defensively. I have to admit Gbinije is growing on me. Our D is noticeably better with his length up top.

Patterson - Got into the game early this time around, and made his only shot, but he is clearly one of the last off the bench at this point. Remember when Francis (and later Mike Waters and Donna Ditota) compared Patterson to the kind of tenacious guard that Pitt might have? Well, that is not a good thing as far as drawing fouls goes. He is going to need to work on keeping his hands off when he's defending.

Grant - Dominated just like he did in Canada which is a good thing. He missed too many free throws but its early yet. I don't think that will be a big issue for him. I do think he's going to earn TONS of trips to the line this year, so he should get plenty of practice.

Roberson - I'm on the Roberson band wagon. You can see him getting it! He is going to be a star here for us. He missed a few jumpers in this one, but also earned a few trips to the stripe and knocked down his free throws. He's going to be very good for us, probably this year.

Johnson - Another player I like, but we need him to shoot good, and in this game he was 1-7, which limited both his effectiveness and his minutes.

Keita - Not much to say here. He's rock solid.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Great report.

 

[Widget24]

Nice write-up, as usual. I like what you said about Roberson because I strongly believe that unless Christmas or Coleman develop into a consistent force very soon, he's going to end up being leaned on pretty heavily for the backup forward minutes. I mentioned it in another thread, but I think it's very likely that we'll see JB move towards a center rotation of Keita and Christmas (with Coleman playing sparingly again) when we get into conference play, regardless of what the starting lineup is. IMO, that leaves Roberson, and possibly Gbinije, to back up Fair and Grant at the forward spots. I've been very high on Roberson ever since he committed to the University of Syracuse, and it's encouraging to hear Hopkins say that he's been very impressive in practices thus far. He's reminded me a little of a freshman Grant so far, so that can't be a bad thing. I also really liked his little jab step fake he had late in the Cornell game. It reminded me a lot of the ones Carmelo used frequently.

 

[bballbeadle]

Dear General, please keep up these reports. It helps me because even though I go to every game, often I have no idea what I've just seen!

 

[Orangezoo]

I don't disagree with any of this. Great report and great job putting the reality of the result in perspective. I was at work during the game but watched the replay when I got home. Your points about playing defense to not foul and to rebound well were key. Transition points are more likely to come off rebounds vs steals for us. Having Ennis and his ability to be more offensive minded and limiting turnovers is definitely an asset. If Grant can improve his free throws and Trevor can stay out of foul trouble we really should be in the 90's a lot more with the weapons we have. One thing I still think the officials could focus more on is the bumping the cutter and the illegal screens. I can take the occasion half handcheck or body bump more than illegal screens and purposely running into either the cutter or the defender chasing the cutter with another illegal screen.

 

[cliftonparksufan]

Thanks. I watched last nights game on my 7" tablet so it was a little difficult to follow all the action and to keep my attention span especially when I was watching the MSU/UK game on the big screen. Even on the little tablet I could see CJ and Jeremi and Ennis having good games but I missed out on why Gbinjie only played 11 minutes. Thanks.

 

[tee1222]

Great job, General

 

[SoBeCuse]

Great job. Gbinjie growing on me just like how you said. Good point on Patterson. I think those two Fordham guards will get paid to play pro ball somewhere. Severe could be in the NBA someday.

 

[SoBeCuse]

Maybe they will stink but I just have a feeling that Cornell and Fordham are going to do well in the Ivy/A10 this season. Boeheim said in the presser that those two guards from Fordham will be as good as they will see all year.

 

[heresjohnny88]

Good report. Totally agree on Roberson. I'm a fan.

And I also agree on Fordham not being THAT bad. Definitely a team we should handle 99% of the time, but not completely horrendous. Severe is a legit high-major player.

 

[CaptainJ]

Lets just say that if SU finds it hard to stop penetration, it would be a very bad thing for us.

I hope our zone will continue to be the chastity belt of college ball.

 

[CaptainJ]

Keita - Not much to say here. He's rock solid.

I dont want to sound older than I am, but if I ever bother to learn how to make youtube videos, I think BMK would be a great candidate to have pictures and/or highlight footage set to the Bob Seger song, "Like A Rock", that some will remember from the Chevy Truck commercials from the 90s.

I celebrate his plays a bit differently than those of the others because I can relate to starting from a different baseline and what it entails. Thinking about this guy makes me feel warm about humanity during times where I've seen enough to make me feel otherwise. Not sure if anyone else has trouble focusing on the good, but BMK at times helps me to do just that. BMK, like a rock.

 

[Cheriehoop]

Very nice report. The new officiating emphases appears to favor dribble-drive offenses. From the Fordham game, it looks like the refs are not only trying to eliminate hand checking and charges but also any contact in our zone closeouts. When Fordham attempted penetration , our zone pinched to defend against it. I saw 2 specific instances where the Fordham guard forced his way between the small gap between the guards who had dropped back and pinched,creating contact, fouls were called on us both times I saw it in the 2nd half.

Our zone is effective because of these rotations denying penetration and forcing teams to rush perimeter shots or use clock to break down the rotations. If penetrators are going to consistently get the advantage offensively, our zone will have to make adjustments especially if moving one's feet and beating the opponent to the spot is not going to be rewarded by a charge call. Will be interesting to see how teams play will adjust to how games are officiated.

 

[jordoo]

You might ask yourself, what changed? The answer is, not much. Fordham didn't do anything different offensively - Severe, Thomas and Frazier took the majority of the first half threes that missed, and they took the majority of the second half threes that went in. The Syracuse zone continued to hold its shape in the second half as it did in the first half. Fordham did not enjoy excessive amounts of open threes or threes in transition. But yet their shots went in.

Roberson - I'm on the Roberson band wagon. You can see him getting it! He is going to be a star here for us. He missed a few jumpers in this one, but also earned a few trips to the stripe and knocked down his free throws. He's going to be very good for us, probably this year.

Johnson - Another player I like, but we need him to shoot good, and in this game he was 1-7, which limited both his effectiveness and his minutes.
.

Awesome write up as always. Thanks for taking the time and I hope you have enough time to do most of the games this year.

I agree in general about the second half but there were a few three's we defended very poorly. Also all our guards got whistled for lots fouls out top defending penetration. Ennis was the only one who avoided multiple calls like this which is anther indication of his ability to apply his smarts in game. The fouls had them a bit tenetive which slowed down the close outs a tiny bit. That said there were about 4 made three's by them in the second half where the defense was excellent and exactly what we would like to see from our guys.

Roberson and Johnson are scorers! They think and move in that way. Both look for open area's/shots and are then aggressive when getting the ball. I think BJ is a tad too aggressive at this point and may be rushing his jumper a bit. You can see he's usually long and the balls seems almost pushed toward the hoop a touch. Tyler is getting closer and closer and although he didn't make his jumpers in this game I thought he took a big step forward on both ends from the Cornell game. He's going to be a good one and its already fun to watch him operate on offense.

Very nice report. The new officiating emphases appears to favor dribble-drive offenses. From the Fordham game, it looks like the refs are not only trying to eliminate hand checking and charges but also any contact in our zone closeouts. When Fordham attempted penetration , our zone pinched to defend against it. I saw 2 specific instances where the Fordham guard forced his way between the small gap between the guards who had dropped back and pinched,creating contact, fouls were called on us both times I saw it in the 2nd half.

Our zone is effective because of these rotations denying penetration and forcing teams to rush perimeter shots or use clock to break down the rotations. If penetrators are going to consistently get the advantage offensively, our zone will have to make adjustments especially if moving one's feet and beating the opponent to the spot is not going to be rewarded by a charge call. Will be interesting to see how teams play will adjust to how games are officiated.

I will also be watching this closely Cheriehoop. In the first half they didn't call body contact on the drive nearly as much as long as the defender was moving their feet well and keeping their hand's off the ball handler. In the second half almost any contact even when initiated by the ball handler was a whistle. Cooney particularly got two where I thought he played great defense and was entitled to the spot more than the offensive player. He moved his feet and kept his hands up and IMO the offensive player then should have had the onus on him to slow up/stop of change the direction of his drive. Both were called on Cooney and I'd guess that the ref's would have said he was impeding the ball handler if we could have asked them. We also benefited from the same types of whistles on the other end. lets not forget hat his is new for the officials as well and they will undoubtedly be reviewing these games an calls with their superiors to make sure everyone is on the same page. I expect that both the players and ref's will improve in these area's and that in turn will provide us with a better overall product. Your bolded section above is what concerns me as far as our defense goes. I'm OK with not being rewarded but if we are penalized for playing defense with position and moving our feet then we will get into some sticky situations.

 

[General20]

Awesome write up as always. Thanks for taking the time and I hope you have enough time to do most of the games this year.

I agree in general about the second half but there were a few three's we defended very poorly. Also all our guards got whistled for lots fouls out top defending penetration. Ennis was the only one who avoided multiple calls like this which is anther indication of his ability to apply his smarts in game. The fouls had them a bit tenetive which slowed down the close outs a tiny bit. That said there were about 4 made three's by them in the second half where the defense was excellent and exactly what we would like to see from our guys.

Roberson and Johnson are scorers! They think and move in that way. Both look for open area's/shots and are then aggressive when getting the ball. I think BJ is a tad too aggressive at this point and may be rushing his jumper a bit. You can see he's usually long and the balls seems almost pushed toward the hoop a touch. Tyler is getting closer and closer and although he didn't make his jumpers in this game I thought he took a big step forward on both ends from the Cornell game. He's going to be a good one and its already fun to watch him operate on offense.



I will also be watching this closely Cheriehoop. In the first half they didn't call body contact on the drive nearly as much as long as the defender was moving their feet well and keeping their hand's off the ball handler. In the second half almost any contact even when initiated by the ball handler was a whistle. Cooney particularly got two where I thought he played great defense and was entitled to the spot more than the offensive player. He moved his feet and kept his hands up and IMO the offensive player then should have had the onus on him to slow up/stop of change the direction of his drive. Both were called on Cooney and I'd guess that the ref's would have said he was impeding the ball handler if we could have asked them. We also benefited from the same types of whistles on the other end. lets not forget hat his is new for the officials as well and they will undoubtedly be reviewing these games an calls with their superiors to make sure everyone is on the same page. I expect that both the players and ref's will improve in these area's and that in turn will provide us with a better overall product. Your bolded section above is what concerns me as far as our defense goes. I'm OK with not being rewarded but if we are penalized for playing defense with position and moving our feet then we will get into some sticky situations.

You know, I ALMOST wrote a line about the possibility Fordham hit a few extra threes because our guys gave them an extra inch to avoid getting called for any more fouls, but I took it out, one because I wanted to talk about the foul thing in one place at the end, and two because, yea there is a chance they got an extra inch or two of space (its hard to tell for sure on tv) but even if that was the case, I don't think Fordham got enough good looks to justify the percentage they shot (which I believe was 60% after those first nine misses). Fordham shot from pretty deep and not many were wide open.

Cherriehoop articulated what I am worried about better than I did. The zone loses most of its effectiveness if guards can penetrate and draw fouls. I thought Ennis did a good job avoiding this, and Cooney not such a good job. I like to think they can adjust, but its definitely something to keep an eye on.

I think there are going to be fewer stops this year than in a long time, so limiting turnovers (and forcing them on the other side of the ball) is going to be key.

 

[jordoo]

You know, I ALMOST wrote a line about the possibility Fordham hit a few extra threes because our guys gave them an extra inch to avoid getting called for any more fouls, but I took it out, one because I wanted to talk about the foul thing in one place at the end, and two because, yea there is a chance they got an extra inch or two of space (its hard to tell for sure on tv) but even if that was the case, I don't think Fordham got enough good looks to justify the percentage they shot (which I believe was 60% after those first nine misses). Fordham shot from pretty deep and not many were wide open.

Cherriehoop articulated what I am worried about better than I did. The zone loses most of its effectiveness if guards can penetrate and draw fouls. I thought Ennis did a good job avoiding this, and Cooney not such a good job. I like to think they can adjust, but its definitely something to keep an eye on.

I think there are going to be fewer stops this year than in a long time, so limiting turnovers (and forcing them on the other side of the ball) is going to be key.

No doubt a large part of Fordham making so many 3's in the 2nd half was that they made a lot that were well defended and the same well defended shots were not made in the 1st half.

As far a the officiating we have to take a waite and see approach. One thing that we may see is our centers having to come higher and clog the lane on drives that split the guards in the middle if the whistles continue to be so tight. That would make us vulnerable to the baseline runner for a lob as well as any guard who can hit that floater or pull up from the FT line. I also agree that defensive stops will be very hard to come by and turnover/defensive rebounding will be very important this year. We are in good shape on turnovers with Ennis IMO but the forwards and 2G's need to be carful in that area. Rebounding especially on the defensive glass will no doubt be stressed by the coaching staff even more.

 

[triplethrea]

I logged in just to like your OP. I enjoy your takes and insight more than the others. You clearly see the game on a higher level.