Help me figure this recruiting out

[reedny]

I think ya gotta swap Grant and Roberson positions. Grant is growing into a natural 4 and I think the whole reason we got Roberson is he wants to be more of a 3.[/quote]


You might be right, especially if CJ leaves. In that case, since Grant doesn't have any apparent outside game, and Roberson does, I'd say Grant=PF and Roberson=SF.

But if CJ stays, he will eat up most of the SF minutes. Roberson could spell him and backup Grant at PF, where he plays now. But Roberson might be too valuable to sit and, at 6'9+, he can play above the rim and block shots. It's a great problem to have ... ala JB's Olympic squad.

This is standard JB recruiting stuff. He loves versatile players ... Hak's a perfect example. Is he a SF or PF? Roberson ...also shoots from the outside but plays over the rim, blocks shots ...etc. Patterson/BJ Johnson could play the 2 or 3, along with Gbinje. And Obokoh could probably slide over the 5, just as Keita and Rak now do.

 

[General20]

I think the staff is considering the classes of '13 and '14 one huge class, with maybe one more guy in each year. Also we know the draft class of '14 is stocked with talent and it will force borderline 1st round players to go pro after this year, which means MWC (although I don't consider him borderline) , Rak and CJ may all go.

Secondly I think JB's Olympic experience has changed his philosophy a bit and he is recruiting to put more long lean athletes on the court at one time. The James/CJ experiment at the 2 will continue not only this year but looking at recruiting for the foreseeable future. We will have some form of a point forward offense in the future. I love the idea because the zone will be long everywhere and we will have a serious height advantage on the offense end (think Fab 5 for those old enough).

There are no limit to the amount of RS you can have in one year.

You make a really great point, and it does change the way I look at this class. The NBA is trending away from traditional positions and towards athletes with diverse skill sets who can defend multiple positions. Maybe this philosophy has rubbed off on Boeheim due to his time coaching the Olympic team.

Think about a team of Patterson, Gbinije, Grant, McCullough, and Dakari Johnson. That team has no true point guard, no true shooting guard, and really no true small forward or power forward. But it does have four guys who can handle the ball, four guys who can shoot the ball, and four guys who can pass. Not to mention a ridiculous amount of size and athleticism that would simply overwhelm most of the opponents Syracuse came across. It has the feel of a new age NBA team, and I love the thought of it.

 

[jordoo]

You make a really great point, and it does change the way I look at this class. The NBA is trending away from traditional positions and towards athletes with diverse skill sets who can defend multiple positions. Maybe this philosophy has rubbed off on Boeheim due to his time coaching the Olympic team.

Think about a team of Patterson, Gbinije, Grant, McCullough, and Dakari Johnson. That team has no true point guard, no true shooting guard, and really no true small forward or power forward. But it does have four guys who can handle the ball, four guys who can shoot the ball, and four guys who can pass. Not to mention a ridiculous amount of size and athleticism that would simply overwhelm most of the opponents Syracuse came across. It has the feel of a new age NBA team, and I love the thought of it.

Early season a line up like that may struggle against a pressing team but once coached up and with some experience they could throw over the top and get layups over and over again with all that size. It is new age NBA kind of like the Heat when Bosh is the biggest guy out there and Wade is the smallest.

 

[Gabjon]

I think the reason no guards are being discussed for spring is that the top guys still available that are interested in us aren't guards. If a young Derrick Rose was listing cuse on his list we'd be in on it. I think we recruit long athletic guys at every position... and we take the best players we can find that fit that regardless of position.

If Micheal Jordan was available and wanted to come to SU we would take him... of course a philosophy change doesn't make someone stupid, but the roster is intentionally being built with less "prototype guards" and more guys who are "historically forwards" in college. You can't argue that we are becoming a selector school and say its happenstance that we are selecting more "forward types" and less guards types. It is clear that we are doing it and its by choice.

 

[normaliswear]

If Micheal Jordan was available and wanted to come to SU we would take him... of course a philosophy change doesn't make someone stupid, but the roster is intentionally being built with less "prototype guards" and more guys who are "historically forwards" in college. You can't argue that we are becoming a selector school and say its happenstance that we are selecting more "forward types" and less guards types. It is clear that we are doing it and its by choice.

If Rysheed Jordan had commited before Patterson we'd have 2 PGs in this class. We've always prefered big guards, and yes we have more opportunity than before to be picky, so I think we're able to more accurately recruit to JBs vision than before. But I think the general philosophy, big smart, athletic guards and long super athletic forwards remains the same. Within that philosophy we recruit the best talent we can get that particular year. I wouldn't quite call us a selector school yet, maybe a semi-selector.

 

[Gabjon]

If Rysheed Jordan had commited before Patterson we'd have 2 PGs in this class. We've always prefered big guards, and yes we have more opportunity than before to be picky, so I think we're able to more accurately recruit to JBs vision than before. But I think the general philosophy, big smart, athletic guards and long super athletic forwards remains the same. Within that philosophy we recruit the best talent we can get that particular year. I wouldn't quite call us a selector school yet, maybe a semi-selector.

Jordan vs Patterson is not the point. The point is total amount of traditional guards vs traditional forwards vs traditional centers and how many of each do we need. That equation is changing before our eyes. Everyone has pointed out that we are short on traditional guards this year and with the high likelihood that MCW leaves we will be losing 2 guards and replacing them with 2 guards. Mike G was forward at DUKE but will be a guard for us! The way we are building the team has changed.

 

[normaliswear]

Jordan vs Patterson is not the point. The point is total amount of traditional guards vs traditional forwards vs traditional centers and how many of each do we need. That equation is changing before our eyes. Everyone has pointed out that we are short on traditional guards this year and with the high likelihood that MCW leaves we will be losing 2 guards and replacing them with 2 guards. Mike G was forward at DUKE but will be a guard for us! The way we are building the team has changed.

Changing from what? We've NEVER prefered "traditional" guards as you are defining it. We've always used big guards and guys that could be SF at other programs as big guards here. Rafael Addison, 6'7, played SF and G, Red Autry 6'4 PG, Jason Cipolla 6'7 G, Billy Edelin 6'4 PG, Mike Hopkins 6'5 G, Luke Jackson 6'6 G, Marius Janulis 6'6 G... on and on and on throughout the history of the program. Our philosophy remains the same. Our ability to get the guys we prefer is whats improving.

 

[Gabjon]

Changing from what? We've NEVER prefered "traditional" guards as you are defining it. We've always used big guards and guys that could be SF at other programs as big guards here. Rafael Addison, 6'7, played SF and G, Red Autry 6'4 PG, Jason Cipolla 6'7 G, Billy Edelin 6'4 PG, Mike Hopkins 6'5 G, Luke Jackson 6'6 G, Marius Janulis 6'6 G... on and on and on throughout the history of the program. Our philosophy remains the same. Our ability to get the guys we prefer is whats improving.

7 guards over 25 years! I easily do the same with guys 6-3 and under. We are playing guys and will be playings who would have never played guard for us. Case in point James at guard would have never happened a few years ago...never!

 

[normaliswear]

7 guards over 25 years! I easily do the same with guys 6-3 and under. We are playing guys and will be playings who would have never played guard for us. Case in point James at guard would have never happened a few years ago...never!

Oh dear Lord you have to be kidding... I picked the first 7 guys off the top of my head... they're hardly the only ones. Stevie Thompson 6'4 G/F, Sonny Spera 6'5 G, Z Sims 6'4 PG, Preston Shumpert 6'6 G/F, Matt Roe 6'5 G... How many do you need to be wrong? Because there's as many examples as you can ask for. We've had the occasional small guard when we've had to settle for them, Theus, Griffen. But if you're sitting there trying to tell me recruiting big long armed guards is a sudden epiphany JB has had in the last couple years than I don't know what team you've been watching.

 

[asj410]

7 guards over 25 years! I easily do the same with guys 6-3 and under. We are playing guys and will be playings who would have never played guard for us. Case in point James at guard would have never happened a few years ago...never!

I think having James play at the 2 is more out of cautious necessity than anything. With MCW and Triche starting, and only an untested Cooney to back them up, the backcourt is extremely thin this season.

 

[Gabjon]

Oh dear Lord you have to be kidding... I picked the first 7 guys off the top of my head... they're hardly the only ones. Stevie Thompson 6'4 G/F, Sonny Spera 6'5 G, Z Sims 6'4 PG, Preston Shumpert 6'6 G/F, Matt Roe 6'5 G... How many do you need to be wrong? Because there's as many examples as you can ask for. We've had the occasional small guard when we've had to settle for them, Theus, Griffen. But if you're sitting there trying to tell me recruiting big long armed guards is a sudden epiphany JB has had in the last couple years than I don't know what team you've been watching.

Dude you are missing the point! These are all tall guards you are listing we are playing guys who were never projected as guards out of HS at guard. Mike G 6-7 200 lbs, James is 6-8 215. When I argued James should start at 3 people thought I was nuts, because his handle is weak. He is playing back-up 2 guard against a top 20 opponent! We use to play a 3 guard line-ups at times. We will now be playing a 1 guard 3 forwards and 1 center line-ups at times...it has never happened before!

 

[Gabjon]

I think having James play at the 2 is more out of cautious necessity than anything. With MCW and Triche starting, and only an untested Cooney to back them up, the backcourt is extremely thin this season.

There is a reason for that and its not changing next year and it is intentional.

 

[normaliswear]

Dude you are missing the point! These are all tall guards you are listing we are playing guys who were never projected as guards out of HS at guard. Mike G 6-7 200 lbs, James is 6-8 215. When I argued James should start at 3 people thought I was nuts, because his handle is weak. He is playing back-up 2 guard against a top 20 opponent! We use to play a 3 guard line-ups at times. We will now be playing a 1 guard 3 forwards and 1 center line-ups at times...it has never happened before!

And thats just factually incorrect. JB always has, and always will, assemble the best available talent and then decide how to best use it. Right now we're stacked at F and a little light at G... so we move to a more F oriented team. But the base philosophy has remained the same. Big long armed G's and athletic long F's. Just because every team doesn't look identical year to year doesn't mean JB has dropped everything he's done the past 35 years. Just follow the recruiting and you can figure out the probably makeup of our lineup.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

7 guards over 25 years! I easily do the same with guys 6-3 and under. We are playing guys and will be playings who would have never played guard for us. Case in point James at guard would have never happened a few years ago...never!

Jason Cipolla plaurd guard.

Sent from my Vortex using Tapatalk 2

 

[Gabjon]

And thats just factually incorrect. JB always has, and always will, assemble the best available talent and then decide how to best use it. Right now we're stacked at F and a little light at G... so we move to a more F oriented team. But the base philosophy has remained the same. Big long armed G's and athletic long F's. Just because every team doesn't look identical year to year doesn't mean JB has dropped everything he's done the past 35 years. Just follow the recruiting and you can figure out the probably makeup of our lineup.

Where did I write he dropped everything he has done in 35 years? Post a roster that had so few natural guards on it. If we are short at guard and 2 are projected to leave and we are are only bringing in 2 guards out of a class of 6! That is a clear statement of intent. When you play a 6-8 forward at the 2 in second half of a game in which you are in complete control of it shows intent. Name one player whose game/profile is similar to James' that played 2 guard at SU for any reason. These are not mistakes they are intentional decisions. Cooney is a redshirt freshmen not a true freshmen JB chose to play James over him plain and simple.

 

[asj410]

Where did I write he dropped everything he has done in 35 years? Post a roster that had so few natural guards on it. If we are short at guard and 2 are projected to leave and we are are only bringing in 2 guards out of a class of 6! That is a clear statement of intent. When you play a 6-8 forward at the 2 in second half of a game in which you are in complete control of it shows intent. Name one player whose game/profile is similar to James' that played 2 guard at SU for any reason. These are not mistakes they are intentional decisions. Cooney is a redshirt freshmen not a true freshmen JB chose to play James over him plain and simple.

Cooney may be a redshirt freshman, but that doesn't mean he's going to play like a sophomore. Just saying.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I think a couple of things are at play here. First, we're not used to seeing coach give out all of his scholarships. Second, we've only recently started seeing coach really develop a long bench.



Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[Gabjon]

Cooney may be a redshirt freshman, but that doesn't mean he's going to play like a sophomore. Just saying.

It doesn't matter how he played we all know guys who played as true freshmen and played through their mistakes and by the way he didn't play badly. He wasn't throwing the ball all over the place at all. The fact the JB decided to play James over him when James had a few bad TOs is telling.

 

[normaliswear]

Where did I write he dropped everything he has done in 35 years? Post a roster that had so few natural guards on it. If we are short at guard and 2 are projected to leave and we are are only bringing in 2 guards out of a class of 6! That is a clear statement of intent. When you play a 6-8 forward at the 2 in second half of a game in which you are in complete control of it shows intent. Name one player whose game/profile is similar to James' that played 2 guard at SU for any reason. These are not mistakes they are intentional decisions. Cooney is a redshirt freshmen not a true freshmen JB chose to play James over him plain and simple.

Really? Still with this? I already posted one in full... 96 Big PG Z... two converted SFs Cipolla and Junulis at off guard. Playing guys little out of position because we're short handed at one spot doesn't make it some big change. If Dion and Mookie are still here ya think JS gets minutes at G? Guess what? When we've been short on C's... big forwards have gotten minutes at C. When we're been short on SFs, we've played 3 guard lineups. And yes, when we've been short at guard, we've slid forwards to the backcourt. ITS NOT NEW. Sheeesh. Look at a few rosters over the years under JB.

 

[Gabjon]

Really? Still with this? I already posted one in full... 96 Big PG Z... two converted SFs Cipolla and Junulis at off guard. Playing guys little out of position because we're short handed at one spot doesn't make it some big change. If Dion and Mookie are still here ya think JS gets minutes at G? Guess what? When we've been short on C's... big forwards have gotten minutes at C. When we're been short on SFs, we've played 3 guard lineups. And yes, when we've been short at guard, we've slid forwards to the backcourt. ITS NOT NEW. Sheeesh. Look at a few rosters over the years under JB.

Lets agree to disagree!

 

[normaliswear]

Lets agree to disagree!

fair enough

 

[orangefan13]

I think having James play at the 2 is more out of cautious necessity than anything. With MCW and Triche starting, and only an untested Cooney to back them up, the backcourt is extremely thin this season.

On the defensive end I agree but on the offensive not so much. James is practicing less elevation on his jumpshot and his arc with a softer touch. That will help him against smaller twos. He can be a mismatch for a 3 let alone a 2 in the lowpost and can make some things happen off a few dribbles here and there.

Not that the benefits of 4 three point shooters on the floor together with James at the three isn't also good. Opening the paint for post up slashers while Fair is in the high post with a big in the mid-low.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

On the defensive end I agree but on the offensive not so much. James is practicing less elevation on his jumpshot and his arc with a softer touch. That will help him against smaller twos.

This makes Zero sense to me.

 

[IthacaMatt]

You make a really great point, and it does change the way I look at this class. The NBA is trending away from traditional positions and towards athletes with diverse skill sets who can defend multiple positions. Maybe this philosophy has rubbed off on Boeheim due to his time coaching the Olympic team.

Think about a team of Patterson, Gbinije, Grant, McCullough, and Dakari Johnson. That team has no true point guard, no true shooting guard, and really no true small forward or power forward. But it does have four guys who can handle the ball, four guys who can shoot the ball, and four guys who can pass. Not to mention a ridiculous amount of size and athleticism that would simply overwhelm most of the opponents Syracuse came across. It has the feel of a new age NBA team, and I love the thought of it.

Whitehead will be coming.

 

[IthacaMatt]

7 guards over 25 years! I easily do the same with guys 6-3 and under. We are playing guys and will be playings who would have never played guard for us. Case in point James at guard would have never happened a few years ago...never!

6-3 vs. 6-4 at guard is not the issue. How many really long guys have we played on top - he didn't mention Kueth Duany in 2003. Now, how many guards less than 6-0 have we had? Fewer than the really big ones, I'll bet.