I just read part of that Cooney thread for the first time.

[cliftonparksufan]

I just shake my head and laugh. Of course we have had at least a dozen Cooney threads and the last thing we need is another one, but is he our most polarizing player since Andy Rautins. And was Andy our most polarizing player since GMac.

Let's all admit that we appreciate what Cooney brings to the table. Let's all admit that he is doing much better than anyone expected. Let's all admit that Cooney must be an unbelievably hard worker. Let's all admit we are very happy to have Cooney as our starting two guard and that we are happy with Gbinjie as the backup.

Speaking of Cooney, I love the nickname "White Hot". While I think it fits him absolutely perfect, how come we don't call him the Delaware Destroyer. Obviously it's not original but that is what he is. Having a great three point shooter like him (when he is on) just destroys the other team. With thanks to Pat Travers to keep us warm on this nice cold morning (and not George Thorogood), Cooney's theme song could be "Boom boom, Out go the lights".

 

[pfister1]

I don't know, doesn't seem all that much different IMO than the treatment that Brandon Triche often received and Scoop Jardine before him.

But I agree we should be really really happy with what he has given us to this point in the season, because its a huge step up from where he was last year and it doesn't appear that there is anyone on the roster that is ready to give us anywhere near the production we get from the Delaware Destroyer.

 

[cliftonparksufan]

I don't know, doesn't seem all that much different IMO than the treatment that Brandon Triche often received and Scoop Jardine before him.

Good point. It must be a guard thing.

Cooney: Polarizing
BT: Polarizing
Scoop: Polarizing
Andy: Polarizing
GMac: Polarizing

 

[Guinness]

White Hot is a fantastic nickname. The Delaware Destroyer not so much.

 

[Jack Hall]

Good point. It must be a guard thing.

Cooney: Polarizing
BT: Polarizing
Scoop: Polarizing
Andy: Polarizing
GMac: Polarizing

Tough to do well in a March wo v good guard play, the ball is in their hands and 3 pt shooting has become such a critical part of the game......

 

[djdan]

Of course we have had at least a dozen Cooney threads and the last thing we need is another one, but is he our most polarizing player since Andy Rautins. And was Andy our most polarizing player since GMac.

At the risk of hijacking the thread, I have no recollection of Andy Rautins being a polarizing player. I recall there being some talk of a "wasted scholarship" his freshmen year but it became pretty clear by his sophomore year that he was a legitimate D1 athlete, and by his junior and senior years, became virtually beloved. At least that's my recollection.

 

[Lawrinson14]

White Hot is a fantastic nickname. The Delaware Destroyer not so much.

White Hot! (also my favorite mock-up I've done for this board)

 

[Jack Hall]

Good point. It must be a guard thing.

Cooney: Polarizing
BT: Polarizing
Scoop: Polarizing
Andy: Polarizing
GMac: Polarizing

A little off topic but someone posted this site, don't know how legit their analysis is, but if it is legit it is amazing that our freshman pg leads the team over studs CJ and Grant. IMO bodes very well for march...


http://statsheet.com/mcb/statrank/players

 

[kuethstheman]

At the risk of hijacking the thread, I have no recollection of Andy Rautins being a polarizing player. I recall there being some talk of a "wasted scholarship" his freshmen year but it became pretty clear by his sophomore year that he was a legitimate D1 athlete, and by his junior and senior years, became virtually beloved. At least that's my recollection.

His sophomore year he had a number of bad games, especially on the road and against good teams. Some thought that meant he was still and would always be shaky potatoes.

 

[SoBristol]

Could add some forwards to the list of players who polarized the board: Donte Greene, Paul Harris, Kristof O.

The guard controversy is usually different in each case. Scoop -- tried to do too much; or shouldn't be the PG ahead of BT. BT -- shouldn't be starting ahead of Dion, or shouldn't sit in crunch time. GMAC -- he's very good, but how good. There isn't a single theme.
With Cooney, for the most part, it is a thin controversy. He has made himself into a very good shooter this year, deserves to start, should play 30 minutes, is by far our best 3 point shooter and is developing an all-around game (but could still add a dimension), but how much did he contribute to the St John win simply by occupying Harrison in StJohn's M2M? Seems like a fair point to debate -- and doesn't go to Cooney's value or contributions in other tough games.

 

[dollarbill44]

At the risk of hijacking the thread, I have no recollection of Andy Rautins being a polarizing player. I recall there being some talk of a "wasted scholarship" his freshmen year but it became pretty clear by his sophomore year that he was a legitimate D1 athlete, and by his junior and senior years, became virtually beloved. At least that's my recollection.

You must have forgotten then. There were several posters who routinely stated that him even having a schollie was because of his father. It was really only his senior year that a lot of posters backed off.

 

[DoctorBombay]

Could add some forwards to the list of players who polarized the board: Donte Greene, Paul Harris, Kristof O.

The guard controversy is usually different in each case. Scoop -- tried to do too much; or shouldn't be the PG ahead of BT. BT -- shouldn't be starting ahead of Dion, or shouldn't sit in crunch time. GMAC -- he's very good, but how good. There isn't a single theme.
With Cooney, for the most part, it is a thin controversy. He has made himself into a very good shooter this year, deserves to start, should play 30 minutes, is by far our best 3 point shooter and is developing an all-around game (but could still add a dimension), but how much did he contribute to the St John win simply by occupying Harrison in StJohn's M2M? Seems like a fair point to debate -- and doesn't go to Cooney's value or contributions in other tough games.

That Cooney-bashing thread, and that's all that it really amounts to, is beyond ridiculous, IMO.
Some folks have short memories and hate prosperity- so its always much better to just biotche & moan rather than see the big picture.
This team has been a very pleasant surprise, IMO, and one of the main reasons has been the play of Cooney.
We all sorta expected Jerami to emerge, we saw glimpses last year. But Cooney, even more than Ennis, was an unknown factor.
I re-watched the game and where he had issues was on the defensive end. On offense the entire game was played in the blocks because Harrison was focused on Cooney's belly-button on every play. Jerami, CJ, TE, even Rak's driving into the lane was largely due to this being a major factor.
Again, its always baffling how some folks choose to view certain players and the SU team, year-after year-after year...
The names change, but the negativity remains the same. Just par for the course.

 

[iommi]

At the risk of hijacking the thread, I have no recollection of Andy Rautins being a polarizing player. I recall there being some talk of a "wasted scholarship" his freshmen year but it became pretty clear by his sophomore year that he was a legitimate D1 athlete, and by his junior and senior years, became virtually beloved. At least that's my recollection.

His main detractor was that assclown, jambandjunkie or whatever his name was.

 

[SoBristol]

...
This team has been a very pleasant surprise, IMO, and one of the main reasons has been the play of Cooney.
We all sorta expected Jerami to emerge, we saw glimpses last year. But Cooney, even more than Ennis, was an unknown factor.
... View attachment 6195

Very true -- Ennis was not entirely unknown, though. He was a star in tough play-off games, led the Canadian U-19 team in scoring, continued at a high level in our exhibitions in Canada in August. Cooney has been more of a revelation in games in Maui and against Indiana.
I will say, again, that there is room for fair debate about Cooney's contribution against StJohn's as well as debate about whether inserting Gbinije on defense was the best move at the time. This is a forum -- there will be that sort of debate, from game to game, depending on how the performances play out. We get it now, on the relative value of Coleman, Rak or Keita -- and some of that comes from whether posters value defense, or offense. Or, did CJ have an MVP game despite a couple of key turn-overs?

 

[moqui]

At the risk of hijacking the thread, I have no recollection of Andy Rautins being a polarizing player. I recall there being some talk of a "wasted scholarship" his freshmen year but it became pretty clear by his sophomore year that he was a legitimate D1 athlete, and by his junior and senior years, became virtually beloved. At least that's my recollection.

you are right . . . I was one of those who questioned his scholarship at first (as I did Cooney's)

I would also add that GMac is absolute not a polarizing player - he is probably the most beloved player in the Boeheim era, and his greatness is accepted uncritically by 95% of posters. That is the opposite of polarizing. He should be polarizing, but he isn't.

 

[mayselc]

Good point. It must be a guard thing.

Cooney: Polarizing
BT: Polarizing
Scoop: Polarizing
Andy: Polarizing
GMac: Polarizing

I think that one of the main reasons that guards (and shooting guards particularly) tend to be more polarizing among fans is that most fans tend to identify with them.

The average CYO/YMCA/HS basketball player (which is a category that many hardcore fans fit into) that develops a decent jump shot tends to put themselves into that position on the court. It's a lot tougher to identify with a 6'8" typical SU wing player because they are such a physical aberration.

Maybe call it "below the rim" syndrome?

 

[two3zone]

you are right . . . I was one of those who questioned his scholarship at first (as I did Cooney's) I would also add that GMac is absolute not a polarizing player - he is probably the most beloved player in the Boeheim era, and his greatness is accepted uncritically by 95% of posters. That is the opposite of polarizing. He should be polarizing, but he isn't.

I as well questioned Andy's scholarship. Between out recruiting St Bonaventure or whatever else school was after him I wasn't sure what the heck we were doing. But there's a reason I'm not a basketball scout.

 

[Waltdods]

you are right . . . I was one of those who questioned his scholarship at first (as I did Cooney's)

I would also add that GMac is absolute not a polarizing player - he is probably the most beloved player in the Boeheim era, and his greatness is accepted uncritically by 95% of posters. That is the opposite of polarizing. He should be polarizing, but he isn't.

It's definitely true that since GMAC graduated - heading off to the sunset fresh from that ridiculous '06 BET - he's been all but canonized. During his last two years, though, there was a lot of polarization around him right up until that tournament run. Nostalgia improves almost everyone's reputation, and for good reason this effect was much stronger with GMAC than most anyone else. (Lots of focus on the most salient memories, and GMAC's Championship 1st half, BYU explosion, and '06 BET are about as good as moments get.) My impression in that '05-06 period was that the more casual fans loved McNamara - one Christmas, about four of us in the family bought #3 jerseys for my mother - but many of us who considered ourselves more sophisticated bitched about him a lot.

I tend towards your view of McNamara, but he was in some ways such a unique player historically that it's hard to figure out how to place him. He really was an inefficient volume shooter who never developed as a point guard and was probably always a below-replacement defensive player. But man he did some stuff. I'd like to say he was just a very high-variance player, and there's something to that - he would take a lot of tough shots, and sometimes he'd make a bunch of them too. But this is probably selling him short some - making 6 three pointers in the first half of a national championship game could be luck, but then when the next year you drop 43 points in a tournament game, and a couple years later you put together the singular performance in Big East tournament history, it's hard to say he's just a lottery ticket.

 

[Phillymoose]

you are right . . . I was one of those who questioned his scholarship at first (as I did Cooney's)

I would also add that GMac is absolute not a polarizing player - he is probably the most beloved player in the Boeheim era, and his greatness is accepted uncritically by 95% of posters. That is the opposite of polarizing. He should be polarizing, but he isn't.

Agree the debate dried up after the NC in 03, but going into that season and up until the tournament, some of worst rhetoric in board history was related to Gmac. One of our board legends declared that he 'starts from day 1' and that lit this place up like a Christmas tree for months. Of course he did start from day 1 - but somehow it turned into a Gmac vs. Billy debate which is absurd since the two players were so different, and complimented each other well. Also, Gmac was embroiled in some controversy that year regarding 'whose team this really is' BS - and the distribution of shots and offense with another, ahem, superstar.

Whatever - he's an SU legend just on the one BET alone, let alone 6 treys in the first half of the NC game, and looking back on all the nonsense during that season just cements the fact that the fanbase, even the supposedly most informed of us, is dumb as a box of rocks.

 

[Rocco]

White Hot! (also my favorite mock-up I've done for this board)

View attachment 6193

Better than Melo, Dc & the boys beating up Ewing & GTown??? Can't be bro.

 

[rrlbees]

One of our board legends declared that he 'starts from day 1' and that lit this place up like a Christmas tree for months.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

 

[Jack Hall]

It's definitely true that since GMAC graduated - heading off to the sunset fresh from that ridiculous '06 BET - he's been all but canonized. During his last two years, though, there was a lot of polarization around him right up until that tournament run. Nostalgia improves almost everyone's reputation, and for good reason this effect was much stronger with GMAC than most anyone else. (Lots of focus on the most salient memories, and GMAC's Championship 1st half, BYU explosion, and '06 BET are about as good as moments get.) My impression in that '05-06 period was that the more casual fans loved McNamara - one Christmas, about four of us in the family bought #3 jerseys for my mother - but many of us who considered ourselves more sophisticated bitched about him a lot.

I tend towards your view of McNamara, but he was in some ways such a unique player historically that it's hard to figure out how to place him. He really was an inefficient volume shooter who never developed as a point guard and was probably always a below-replacement defensive player. But man he did some stuff. I'd like to say he was just a very high-variance player, and there's something to that - he would take a lot of tough shots, and sometimes he'd make a bunch of them too. But this is probably selling him short some - making 6 three pointers in the first half of a national championship game could be luck, but then when the next year you drop 43 points in a tournament game, and a couple years later you put together the singular performance in Big East tournament history, it's hard to say he's just a lottery ticket.

Not the most gifted player we ever had but he left it ALL out on the court. How can you ask for more? And certainly JBs famous profanity laced rant on Gmac illustrates that JB got all he asked from him...