G & Rak.....

[NineOneSeven]

I've been waiting for Christmas to get consistent looks for 3 years. About time.

He's having a phenomenal season on both ends and I love every second of it.

Myself, ghost, OiG, and a few others, have been big rak supporters for a long time so I'm sure they are also happy to see him succeed and contribute.

He's our best player.

 

[Ghost]

Rak has been good all year long and is becoming better and better as the season advances. G was somewhat shaky at 1st, but the light bulb has really turned on for him lately. The light is now burning bright for both. Same can be said for Cooney. Now the 3 need to stay consistent. Now, we need the others to do the same. For KJ, the bulb is slowly but methodically becoming brighter. Need the same from TR and CM. And they all need to increase/maintain defensive intensity. Then, this board will really light up too.

G's progression has been up and down, but it is nice to see what he's capable of. Whether his increased production opened things up for Cooney, or Cooney being more assertive has helped open things up for G a bit (probably) it has been nice to see production from so many spots on the floor of late.

His mid-range game has been superb of late - hopefully he keeps that up. Triche always seemed to have that as part of his repertoire, and I always felt like he could have used it to open up his game more. A few dribbles, step back, pull-up and pop the mid-range jumper - a nice skill to have when you're not hitting from three...or even if you are.

 

[pearl31]

I'm willing to bet Rak would have been involved in the offense alot more the last couple of years if, a) he had been fully engaged and interested consistently, and, b) he had been able to not consistently have 2 (usually quite unnecessary) fouls by midway through the 1st half. Sorry, but those impediments were on Rak.
Again, you seem to be pretty much saying either: JB didn't involve him more on purpose, knowing he should, to the detriment of the team - or he didn't involve him more because he couldn't see that it would be good for the team.
so what's up?

 

[OttoMets]

And what are you picking? Boeheim willfully didn't run the offense through Rak—knowing it actually would be better for the team and apparently not wanting what was best for the team? Or, better yet, he didn't run the offense through him because he just didn't have the judgement or acumen to see how effective Rak would have been?

He just doesn't want to. Like a press, running the offense through the post is Boeheim's option of last resort. He wants a wing-oriented offense. Only when everything else is a total disaster (the beginning of this season, 1997) will he relent and made feeding the post a priority.

 

[pearl31]

He just doesn't want to. Like a press, running the offense through the post is Boeheim's option of last resort. He wants a wing-oriented offense. Only when everything else is a total disaster (the beginning of this season, 1997) will he relent and made feeding the post a priority.

Again, though, you're saying that he willfully refuses to do what's best for the team. Complete bunk.

 

[CaptainJ]

For whatever reason he was a lot more comfortable with Bad Mutha Keita .

Shut your mouth!

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Again, though, you're saying that he willfully refuses to do what's best for the team. Complete bunk.

I don't know. When the press gets us a lead, why does he call it off?

 

[TBCuse11]

I gotta confess - I did not see it coming with either player.

Rak has just made a huge jump from last season. The only others guys who I can remember making similar Jr to Sr jumps were Danny Schayes & Sims, and in both cases it was because they didn't get much run as underclassmen. Rak's jump is totally unique for a guy who has had his minutes. He has been consistent for 12 games, so there is no reason to think it will not continue.

G has really surprised. He has just made a quantum jump out of the blue. His form is suddenly looking stellar on his J, and he is showing trey range. Truthfully, I had only see him as a slash & dash type who didn't seemed tough enough to go inside & finish consistently. Of course, his sudden jump is only a few games old, so we have to hope that this new G is the real deal. Equally surprisingly, is that he has shown enough moxie under the class to play the three. Last year he looked really meek & out of place at the three spot. Not to mention that he has been a huge help in taking pressure off of Kaleb in bringing the ball up. His continuing to play at this new level, along with Cooney maintaining his strong recent play, are probably the two biggest linchpins to us turning it around and having a successful season.

It looks like the team his figured out what to do, and that to do is relying on a big three of X, Cooney, and G. The nice thing about that mix is you have an inside guy, a slash guy who can hit from outside, and an outside guy who can now do some slashing. There are also some nice complimentary pieces with plenty of upside in KJ and McC plus Beast seems to be finding himself. Problem is when I add that all up it only comes to six guys. We need somebody else to emerge and be able to help off the bench. Jimmy seems to be leaning towards Patterson for that role, hope it plays out.

All in all, the team still badly needs a couple of signature wins to really prove the pieces add up against serious competition.

I agree 100% on G. Although i personally think hes our best player, he showed nothing until recently. Huge turnaround,

As for Rak, i think he had moves for quite some time now. Last year, we simply refused to dump it down low... ever. We will never know, and its a moot point, but Im glad we are FINALLY utilizing the center position.

 

[pearl31]

I don't know. When the press gets us a lead, why does he call it off?

Are you serious?

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Are you serious?

Yes. Look, nobody is debating Coach's greatness. He's in rare air in terms of the success he's had as a coach. But there are absolutely some tendencies he prefers that he won't stray from unless he has to, and once he's comfortable he'll go back to his tendencies. It's not the worst thing, his tendencies are winning ones, but it is fair to question at times if different choices can be made, and if they can be made, maybe sometimes they should be made.

 

[pearl31]

Yes. Look, nobody is debating Coach's greatness. He's in rare air in terms of the success he's had as a coach. But there are absolutely some tendencies he prefers that he won't stray from unless he has to, and once he's comfortable he'll go back to his tendencies. It's not the worst thing, his tendencies are winning ones, but it is fair to question at times if different choices can be made, and if they can be made, maybe sometimes they should be made.

OK, great, but what does this have to do with not keeping the press on? His press is designed as a brief change-up to alter the game in some way and get his team going. Last game his team was down 10 and playing sluggishly and so JB went with the press and in a couple of minutes his team was up 1 and playing with energy and then never looked back. It was never meant as any kind of game-long or even half-long implement. There are no tendencies to go back to or move away from.

 

[br801]

I don't know. When the press gets us a lead, why does he call it off?

I think when JB does something strategically that is outside his comfort zone and it's working, he likes to cash in his chips before he starts giving some of them back. It's simply the way he prefers to coach.

 

[pearl31]

and I'm fully willing to question JB's tactics. i.e., I've always felt he should generally be more willing to use his bench, and maybe (at least with certain lineups) switch defenses once in a while

 

[CaptainJ]

Unless my memory is a bit off, JB used to seem to like to use the press back in the day.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

OK, great, but what does this have to do with not keeping the press on? His press is designed as a brief change-up to alter the game in some way and get his team going. Last game his team was down 10 and playing sluggishly and so JB went with the press and in a couple of minutes his team was up 1 and playing with energy and then never looked back. It was never meant as any kind of game-long or even half-long implement. There are no tendencies to go back to or move away from.

OK, we're getting exactly to the point though - the press may be designed as a change-up, but why does it have to be? We were sluggish, we erased a ten point deficit to an inferior team, and then we... stopped?

What would have happened had we kept the press on? Is there something special about our press that it for sure breaks down once you run it 4 or 5 straight times? Maybe our length makes it such that a less skilled and physically imposing team never gets comfortable against it. Maybe Long Beach figures it out and goes on a run. We don't know because we don't get to see how successful something different could be.

br801 nailed it I think. JB will mix it up if he has to, but he hedges. He's more comfortable ceasing an advantage outside his norm before it has the chance to become a detriment. We know he has his magic slide rule that tells him when to slow down to close out games with a lead. His stuff, by the numbers, works, but what we don't ever know is if those advantages outside the norm actually would become a detriment.

That's fair to question for other things that are JB staples - short bench, not prioritizing post offense, reliance on 2-3, calling off the trunk monkey press, etc. I'm not saying he's wrong, I'm saying it's fair to question unknowns. It's remarkable actually that he's so consistent that we can actually see some clear deviations when they happen.

 

[jordoo]

If JB is only going to play 6 guys he cannot press for extended minutes without causing foul issues and tired legs. Pressing teams generally play an extended rotation for these reasons. JB hasn't set up his teams to press bottom line and only uses it to raise our energy, change the flow of the game or if we need to steal possessions late in a game. I tend to agree with br801 that once its successful JB is looking to stop gambling as soon as possible. Usually right after the first time they break it and get a layup.

That said pressing is a completely viable strategy and has been proven successful just like the 2-3 has. RickP uses pressing back into a gambling 2-3 match up zone very effectively. He's much like JB in the sense that he is playing the percentages except he's more of a gambler and prefers to be able to force the action more. You can see the same with his offense as he has almost always allowed a majority of his guys the green light from 3 at almost anytime which is a percentage play but also more of a gamble than working for the higher percentage shot.

Systems Systems Systems.

 

[pearl31]

OK, we're getting exactly to the point though - the press may be designed as a change-up, but why does it have to be? We were sluggish, we erased a ten point deficit to an inferior team, and then we... stopped?

What would have happened had we kept the press on? Is there something special about our press that it for sure breaks down once you run it 4 or 5 straight times? Maybe our length makes it such that a less skilled and physically imposing team never gets comfortable against it. Maybe Long Beach figures it out and goes on a run. We don't know because we don't get to see how successful something different could be.

br801 nailed it I think. JB will mix it up if he has to, but he hedges. He's more comfortable ceasing an advantage outside his norm before it has the chance to become a detriment. We know he has his magic slide rule that tells him when to slow down to close out games with a lead. His stuff, by the numbers, works, but what we don't ever know is if those advantages outside the norm actually would become a detriment.

That's fair to question for other things that are JB staples - short bench, not prioritizing post offense, reliance on 2-3, calling off the trunk monkey press, etc. I'm not saying he's wrong, I'm saying it's fair to question unknowns. It's remarkable actually that he's so consistent that we can actually see some clear deviations when they happen.

Mostly agree. But in RE the LBSU game, are you saying we really should have won by 28? by 38? From where I'm sitting - JB calibrated it just right and after the brief trunkmonkey his team coasted to an easy win. He knew something was needed at that stage of the game and it yielded the necessary result to propel the team for the rest of the game.

 

[br801]

OK, we're getting exactly to the point though - the press may be designed as a change-up, but why does it have to be? We were sluggish, we erased a ten point deficit to an inferior team, and then we... stopped?

What would have happened had we kept the press on? Is there something special about our press that it for sure breaks down once you run it 4 or 5 straight times? Maybe our length makes it such that a less skilled and physically imposing team never gets comfortable against it. Maybe Long Beach figures it out and goes on a run. We don't know because we don't get to see how successful something different could be.

br801 nailed it I think. JB will mix it up if he has to, but he hedges. He's more comfortable ceasing an advantage outside his norm before it has the chance to become a detriment. We know he has his magic slide rule that tells him when to slow down to close out games with a lead. His stuff, by the numbers, works, but what we don't ever know is if those advantages outside the norm actually would become a detriment.

That's fair to question for other things that are JB staples - short bench, not prioritizing post offense, reliance on 2-3, calling off the trunk monkey press, etc. I'm not saying he's wrong, I'm saying it's fair to question unknowns. It's remarkable actually that he's so consistent that we can actually see some clear deviations when they happen.

These debates are always interesting and speculating about various strategies is fun, but if any of us were really in JB's shoes we might actually react differently than we think. It's like making hypothetical stock trades or hypothetical wagers on horse races; while you might be able show a nice profit on paper when real money isn't actually on the line, your decision-making and results will likely be far different once your money is actually at stake.

 

[NorSyr66]

So the big question with Rak...did he have this game last year and we foolishly didn't use it or did he magically acquire it over the summer?

He is a senior, his game has steadily improved but the big factor is the offense being more directed through him this year. Last years team just did not flow thru the center position and Rak was seldom around at end of the game due to Keita's defense and Rak's propensity for silly fouls.

Rak has had lapses towards silly fouls a few times this year but it seems over the past 2 to 3 games he is more focused on not giving up the cheap fouls. The Nova game being an exception when it seemed the big men were all targeted for early bench time. When ACC play starts, Rak's ability to play 35+ minutes a game will be a big factor in winning close games.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Mostly agree. But in RE the LBSU game, are you saying we really should have won by 28? by 38? From where I'm sitting - JB calibrated it just right and after the brief trunkmonkey his team coasted to an easy win. He knew something was needed at that stage of the game and it yielded the necessary result to propel the team for the rest of the game.

I'm saying I don't know what would have happened, but once in a while I'd like to have the chance to see what happens.

I suspect against Long Beach we should be ok without having Gbinije and Cooney play the full 40.

 

[jordoo]

These debates are always interesting and speculating about various strategies is fun, but if any of us were really in JB's shoes we might actually react differently than we think. It's like making hypothetical stock trades or hypothetical wagers on horse races; while you might be able show a nice profit on paper when real money isn't actually on the line, your decision-making and results will likely be far different once your money is actually at stake.

Which is why almost every coach goes with what they trust the most in tight games, what they built their success on and what has come through for them the most. There is a reason all these coaches with 500+ wins all run the same system year after year. All of us here that watch a lot of college bball could outline, JB, K, Knight, Huggins, Pitino, Roy ect systems fairly accurately. These guys found something that worked and stayed with it. They obviously tweak things to personal, rule changes and just trial and error over time but they aren't deviating without a damn good reason. Good young coaches install a system, stick with it and fine tune it over time.

 

[Ghost]

Again, though, you're saying that he willfully refuses to do what's best for the team. Complete bunk.

JB from his radio show: "Rakeem isn’t coming (along) – he’s there. He could have gotten there last year but the focus was on the guards and forwards. We had more options then.”

I'm okay with saying willfully - I've felt for three years that working Rak in more would have helped everyone else on the floor. I also sincerely doubt that this kid suddenly learned how to play basketball this summer (and JB seems to admit as much above). In exhibition games he always seemed to exhibit more skill - but then the regular season started and he never touched the ball. Perhaps JB had more faith in his guards/forwards than I did. I don't know.

I think we just don't focus on the position (as Otto has stated) - and, just guessing, but if Ennis and Grant both came back we may very well be seeing a Rak that would still be putting up 8/7 per game. Who knows.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

JB from his radio show: "Rakeem isn’t coming (along) – he’s there. He could have gotten there last year but the focus was on the guards and forwards. We had more options then.”

I'm okay with saying willfully - I've felt for three years that working Rak in more would have helped everyone else on the floor. I also sincerely doubt that this kid suddenly learned how to play basketball this summer (as JB seems to say as well above). In exhibition games he always seemed to exhibit more skill - but then the regular season started and he never touched the ball. Perhaps JB had more faith in his guards/forwards than I did. I don't know.

I think we just don't focus on the position - and if Ennis and Grant both came back we may very well be seeing a Rak that would still be putting up 8/7 per game. Who knows.

If Rak does work his way in to the first round of the draft, it is actually really interesting to think he may have Grant and Ennis to thank for that, in part.

Wouldn't it be a kick in the pants if our early entries paved the way for our 4 year, degree carrying player to get a guaranteed contract?

 

[rrlbees]

He just doesn't want to. Like a press, running the offense through the post is Boeheim's option of last resort. He wants a wing-oriented offense. Only when everything else is a total disaster (the beginning of this season, 1997) will he relent and made feeding the post a priority.

97? He had no problem going inside to Jackson or AO or even Fab.

 

[OttoMets]

97? He had no problem going inside to Jackson or AO or even Fab.

Jackson had fewer than 10 shots a game as a senior, I think. Way fewer for Fab; he was Option #5 on that offense.

Arinze was used a little more frequently, though some would argue not frequently enough. At no point was Jackson or Onuaku a first or second option (and I'm not arguing that Jackson should have been).