I'm changing my view on next season

[Newhouser]

I think we may be better (still bad, but better). Let's say Jesse takes another step in development. Benny has the switch go on and is an actual player. Symir plays the 1 and JG plays his natural 2. I take a flyer and play Frank at the 4 and hope the Frosh coming in can play - Jon as an emergency big.....would that team be dramatically worse than this season's? We'd be more athletic, better rebounding, can't be worse defensively, not as good shooting, and a push on ball handling. Willingness and interest in passing would go up exponentially... lots of IF's but we may not be worse which at the current stage of the program might be all we can ask.

Sadly have to factor in that JB is not what he was in game anymore and that I'm not convinced he doesn't run the whole thing back one more year, but that is a different topic.

 

[Rage4CUSE]

I think we may be better (still bad, but better). Let's say Jesse takes another step in development. Benny has the switch go on and is an actual player. Symir plays the 1 and JG plays his natural 2. I take a flyer and play Frank at the 4 and hope the Frosh coming in can play - Jon as an emergency big...would that team be dramatically worse than this season's? We'd be more athletic, better rebounding, can't be worse defensively, not as good shooting, and a push on ball handling. Willingness and interest in passing would go up exponentially... lots of IF's but we may not be worse which at the current stage of the program might be all we can ask.

Sadly have to factor in that JB is not what he was in game anymore and that I'm not convinced he doesn't run the whole thing back one more year, but that is a different topic.

I don't think it's that Jimmy didn't adjust. I think it's that the game of basketball has changed where forcing people to jack up long 3's aren't really that of bad of a percentage for the opponents.

This isn't the 90's or even aughts(00-09) anymore. Steph Curry and the Warriors have changed the way the game is played and analytics are interpreted.

 

[CousCuse]

I don't think it's that Jimmy didn't adjust. I think it's that the game of basketball has changed where forcing people to jack up long 3's aren't really that of bad of a percentage for the opponents.

This isn't the 90's or even aughts(00-09) anymore. Steph Curry and the Warriors have changed the way the game is played and analytics are interpreted.

Isn't this why we have 3 three point shooters in the starting lineup?

 

[Jeremy L.]

I don't think it's that Jimmy didn't adjust. I think it's that the game of basketball has changed where forcing people to jack up long 3's aren't really that of bad of a percentage for the opponents.

This isn't the 90's or even aughts(00-09) anymore. Steph Curry and the Warriors have changed the way the game is played and analytics are interpreted.

Bingo. Boeheim has said that the zone is forcing teams to make long shots. Unfortunately, teams can make three pointers at a rate nobody has ever seen before.

For kicks and giggles, I pulled up the Villanova game from 2014 (Cuse won 78-62). Syracuse shot 7-13 from three point range that game. Even the Duke game at the Dome, Syracuse shot FOUR threes. Duke shot 36 and at the time it seemed like such a high mark.

Teams do that consistently now.

 

[Jeremy L.]

Digging a little deeper - that 2014 team average just under 15 3p/g attempted (311 in the country) and a total of 505 that season (included postseason). This year, we're averaging 23 3p attempts/game and that's 127th in the country.

 

[Cusefan0307]

The OP’s last sentence is why I am convinced we are screwed. We could have the right players, but they may not play because of the coach.

 

[Red Holzman]

Isn't this why we have 3 three point shooters in the starting lineup?

Interesting...
So your point appears to be that JB built a lineup of 3 point shooters to adapt his offense-
What about adapting his defense to defend the improved 3 point shooting of opponents?

 

[CousCuse]

Interesting...
So your point appears to be that JB built a lineup of 3 point shooters to adapt his offense-
What about adapting his defense to defend the improved 3 point shooting of opponents?

I think, but I'm not an analytics expert, that the analytics say that it is a net positive to have this approach. They need to come out in the second half and shoot like the score is 0-0 and not try to protect a lead.

 

[DilemaCuse]

Isn't this why we have 3 three point shooters in the starting lineup?

Yes but unfortunately there are 2 ends of the court. Where you have to play defense on the other end.

Often they have been 3 point shooters but not 3 pt makers. Last night they made a lot, 17 of them but couldnt dribble and handle the ball and gave up 58 pts in the 2nd half!

58! good SU defenses would hold teams under 58 for the game.

 

[CousCuse]

Yes but unfortunately there are 2 ends of the court. Where you have to play defense on the other end.

Often they have been 3 point shooters but not 3 pt makers. Last night they made a lot, 17 of them but couldnt dribble and handle the ball and gave up 58 pts in the 2nd half!

58! good SU defenses would hold teams under 58 for the game.

SU should have scored more points in the second half.

 

[DilemaCuse]

SU should have scored more points in the second half.

Yep, offense and shooting were the reason for the loss, when they scored 87

Are you posts serious or sarcastic? lol

 

[FRANKIEFAN]

We will probably run things back. We have been in every game this year it might result in a good season.

I think we end up with a better coach if we make an outside hire this year. Now is the time.

 

[CousCuse]

Yep, offense and shooting were the reason for the loss, when they scored 87

Are you posts serious or sarcastic? lol

Do you expect to have guys that can shoot lights out from the 3 and play lockdown D? There are trade offs. I'm saying the coaching staff has changed the roster structure due to the evolution of the game.

 

[Jasoncuse]

I think next year could be as bad, or possibly worse, at least for most of the season. I think we'll actually have a shot to improve and get glimpses of what they can become, unlike this year, where everybody is basically at their ceiling, unathletic and a Jr/Sr.

We'll have to be better defensively, by default, but we're likely to have JG playing 30+ still, Jesse inside (he's ok, but has yet to prove he can hold up to stronger players) and inexperience everywhere else. They should improve over the course of the season, but it's not likely to be a good D.

The offense will likely take a step back, in terms of scoring, but perhaps efficiency and the ability to create for others may improve. At least I'm hoping. I won't have much hope for any better for next year, unless we somehow land some portal studs.

 

[miamicuse]

SU should have scored more points in the second half.

Never thought of that. In fact, all we had to do was score one more point than the opponent each game we would have been undefeated.

 

[cuseguy]

We’ll need a few impact transfers — a combo guard who can score and a combo forward who can score and rebound — if we hope to be a tourney team next year. If can’t pull that off, don’t expect much next year.

 

[two3zone]

Do you expect to have guys that can shoot lights out from the 3 and play lockdown D? There are trade offs. I'm saying the coaching staff has changed the roster structure due to the evolution of the game.

The evolution of the game is positionless basketball and our team is probably the least versatile I’ve ever seen.

 

[Orangezoo]

The evolution of the game is positionless basketball and our team is probably the least versatile I’ve ever seen.

1 true Center who is also mobile, 3 wings who are multi skilled including at least two who can shoot from the outside and a legit PG. A shooter, defensive minded big, athletic wing and backup pg off the bench. All that playing a switching defense that features more like a m t m.

It's what you see all across the Top 25 right now.

 

[orangecuse]

Bingo. Boeheim has said that the zone is forcing teams to make long shots. Unfortunately, teams can make three pointers at a rate nobody has ever seen before.

For kicks and giggles, I pulled up the Villanova game from 2014 (Cuse won 78-62). Syracuse shot 7-13 from three point range that game. Even the Duke game at the Dome, Syracuse shot FOUR threes. Duke shot 36 and at the time it seemed like such a high mark.

Teams do that consistently now.

Not to mention, when said shots are consistently left wide open and uncontested.

 

[Orangezoo]

Also to add around the current recipe for success, for top 40 teams that don't have all those pieces they coach around it to still be solid. Look at Nova- obvious flaws missing having the modern complete team and yet coaching keeps them rolling even if it's not at the elite level.

 

[NineOneSeven]

I think, but I'm not an analytics expert, that the analytics say that it is a net positive to have this approach. They need to come out in the second half and shoot like the score is 0-0 and not try to protect a lead.

Only if you don’t believe hard enough.

 

[CousCuse]

Only if you don’t believe hard enough.

Is this like Peter Pan or something.

 

[Millhouse]

I don't think it's that Jimmy didn't adjust. I think it's that the game of basketball has changed where forcing people to jack up long 3's aren't really that of bad of a percentage for the opponents.

This isn't the 90's or even aughts(00-09) anymore. Steph Curry and the Warriors have changed the way the game is played and analytics are interpreted.

I agree. Sometimes the simple explanation is right.

There was so much macho bs about man vs zone, the man people think zone is less manly and the zone people think that there is so much more to it than exploiting other teams confidence in their three point shooting. That's why the zone worked and that was ok with me.

To defend better than that meant we needed really big guards. Really big guards who can handle the ball, run, and shoot are few and far between. So we vacillate every so often

I'm in the zone has run its course camp

I get mad during games and remember that it never ends great for most coaches

 

[Orangezoo]

Isn't this why we have 3 three point shooters in the starting lineup?

Small and mid major programs having been doing this for years. Positionless basketball is more the modern/GSW approach. You need good shooters but if that is all they do- they are good off the bench. In today's game you need to be able to hit a 3 if you want to start as a wing on a top 25 team but it's so much more than that. You have to be able to be a threat all around if you are gonna play 75 pct of the minutes or more.

 

[Millhouse]

Do you expect to have guys that can shoot lights out from the 3 and play lockdown D? There are trade offs. I'm saying the coaching staff has changed the roster structure due to the evolution of the game.

I'm a firm believer in the tradeoffs. The guards that make the zone really effective are going to be limited on offense. Those guys who have it all have their pick of any school