Interesting comment on Syracuse.com

[dollarbill44]

Purdue has zero tolerance turnover policy at practice. If they turn ball over twice during practice it’s windsprint pain thereafter. Nova and mich were in top 14 of least turnovers last year and played for championship. Onus of turning it over is on us

Purdue is 14-6 just like SU. What is this zero tolerance getting them?
Limiting TOs should be worked on in practice as it leads to more scoring opportunities, so I would guess most years at least one of the teams playing for the NC has pretty solid TO numbers.

 

[GooseMutt]

Purdue is 14-6 just like SU. What is this zero tolerance getting them?
Limiting TOs should be worked on in practice as it leads to more scoring opportunities, so I would guess most years at least one of the teams playing for the NC has pretty solid TO numbers.

Turnover ratio is so important and I wonder how JB goes about it at practice

 

[manleyzoo]

I'm not implying that he's a turnover machine or that statistically his numbers aren't decent in that regard. And, I never said anything about him not being like another coach on the floor, however, to the coach on the floor thing, isn't that kind of a trait of what your point guard is suppose to be anyways? Isn't that a general standard at that position and hence why PG's are referenced as "the floor general" or QB of the team?

As another poster mentioned, our offense is not one of high risk, and a lot of dribbling in place, passing back in forth between the circles, etc. kind of thing. So, that in and of itself, limits turnovers, etc. I don't think the teams you cited above are intense ball pressuring, hounding type teams, I'm specifically referring to, other than VPI the other night. And, that's what I'm mostly suggesting, that in times of aggressive, hounding ball pressure is when Frank really appears to struggle.

Just because his statistical turnover ratio isn't bad in these high ball pressure type games, doesn't mean that he's not having difficulty with his handle, just look at the difficulty we have in scoring. Frank struggles getting by his defender or creating an advantage because he can't take people off the dribble, and some of it is due to his handle not being optical, as well as not being quick a foot. When this happens, our O seems out of sync and discombobulated. Moreover, because of same, it puts extra pressure on our other guys to attempt to get open on their own, create their own space, etc. If, in those situations, Frank could get by people with his ball skills, etc., he has the size to create an advantage. But, because his handle isn't his strength (IMO) he's unable to do this.

This is what I'm generally referring to when I say it's my opinion, based on the games I've seen him play in against those particular types of teams. I feel Frank's main assets are his ability to see the floor (when not be hounded) due to his size and passing skills, followed by his ability to shoot when he's open and not under duress.

There are so many false equivalencies in your post it's hard to know where to start. But let's begin with your criticism of Frank's handle. He's not good enough to play against hounding teams, the offense stagnates when we do because his handle is lacking. But we haven't played any of them other than VaTech. So how do you know that he can't play against teams that rag the ball if we haven't played but one? And in that one he had only 3 TOs. We've actually played two, Pitt hounded Frank into an inexcusable 0 TOs in 34 minutes. Next, it's our offensive scheme that cuts Frank a break. It's his doing that guys stand around looking for one-on-one moves. If only he was better he could zip by his man and create opportunities. What about the guys on the floor who other than Battle can't get by their guy no matter where Frank gives them the ball or can't finish when they do? You seem to be viewing the game the same myopic way some other Frank critics do, watching only him as though no one else for us actually plays. And finally, this team for all its offensive liabilities is still averaging 71 ppg overall and 70 in league play. In the league, every team except for three averaging in the 80s (Duke, NC, NCSt) is averaging in the 70s. Louisville is at 79 ppg and FSU at 78, the rest are in the mid to low 70s. So we're right in the pack in the league with ppg. The numbers say what you see is perception not reality.

 

[CuseNickens]

I think handle is best observed from watching the ball handler, not measured in turnovers. Most turnovers aren't a result of a weak handle and getting stripped. Most are bad passes, charges, traveling etc. If we are equating turnovers with ball handling, Buddy Boeheim is our best ball handler. Frank tends to defer to Tyus whenever he's pressured in the back court, which takes Tyus out of position and it affects the offense. To me a a good ball handler and point guard can beat their defender by either being quick with the ball like a Flynn or strong with the ball like an Ennis, Edelin or Laz Sims. Frank does some really good things and makes alot of big shots and at times can take over a game for stretches, but his ball handling is not a strength. I know its not popular because its hard to quantify but the only way to judge ball handling is by the eye test.

 

[orangecuse]

There are so many false equivalencies in your post it's hard to know where to start. But let's begin with your criticism of Frank's handle. He's not good enough to play against hounding teams, the offense stagnates when we do because his handle is lacking. But we haven't played any of them other than VaTech. So how do you know that he can't play against teams that rag the ball if we haven't played but one? And in that one he had only 3 TOs. We've actually played two, Pitt hounded Frank into an inexcusable 0 TOs in 34 minutes. Next, it's our offensive scheme that cuts Frank a break. It's his doing that guys stand around looking for one-on-one moves. If only he was better he could zip by his man and create opportunities. What about the guys on the floor who other than Battle can't get by their guy no matter where Frank gives them the ball or can't finish when they do? You seem to be viewing the game the same myopic way some other Frank critics do, watching only him as though no one else for us actually plays. And finally, this team for all its offensive liabilities is still averaging 71 ppg overall and 70 in league play. In the league, every team except for three averaging in the 80s (Duke, NC, NCSt) is averaging in the 70s. Louisville is at 79 ppg and FSU at 78, the rest are in the mid to low 70s. So we're right in the pack in the league with ppg. The numbers say what you see is perception not reality.

I did not say he's not good enough, I said this is when he struggles most, "not good enough" are your words. Though we may have only played one aggressive ball pressure team so far this year in VT, my basis is not on this game only, but his Soph & Jr. years as well in games facing high ball pressure, etc. Pitt has freshman guards, they won zero games in the ACC last season, so don't try to compare Pitt to a team that's any good, let alone guards or a D that hounds the ball, that's comical.

Frank is the PG, the "floor general" or QB, it's his main role to get other players in position, handle the rock, set up players, etc. If he is struggling do this, especially when he's facing a lot of pressure, I do believe a lot of it falls on his shoulders. College ball is all about guard play, and as your guards go, so does your team go.

Until a few quick buckets late in that first half, Robinson had more points 24 than us as a team at 20. We ended the half we 24, so Robinson had as many points as us. If you don't think our offense was stagnate against VPI, that's fine, it's your opinion, but I do not share your sentiments about that or when Frank faces hounding ball pressure.

You are not going to convince me otherwise, nor I you, so we can just agree to disagree.

 

[OrangeTarheel]

About the OP Syracuse.com comment about being out-muscled in the paint ... I felt like if that was the case then Michigan State last year, or Duke this year, should have won handily. I do think that a big man who knows where to receive the ball in the zone and turn that into points has a big advantage, but that’s where our guards are supposed to prevent easy interior passing. And forwards not let that scheme get broken down from the edge of the key. So it’s not just having big men on the interior, it’s also scheme and guards (ours on defense, theirs on offense.)

 

[Flacusian]

Turnover ratio is so important and I wonder how JB goes about it at practice

It's pretty much an unspoken assumption by all the players... make no brain W-T-F turnovers and you risk getting "Boeheimed"

 

[sdcuseguy]

Battle and Brissett turn the ball over more than Howard so far in conference play. Our fans like to use Howard as a scapegoat for everything.

From an offense that needs to score points, Frank should be on the radar as someone to question. He has a low turnover rate and plays good defense but he also seems to stifle the offense and is a snail up the court most of the time. For any SU fan watching him this year, it seems to be a miracle if he penetrates into the paint. We need that in order to open up the defenses against us and when Frank is in they seem to overplay knowing Frank probably won't drive to the basket. With Tyus (or even Carey), there is far more of a threat that they will drive to the basket but Frank seems to move side to side more than anything else. No risk-No reward. His style is a recipe for low scoring games decided in the last 2 minutes even with bad teams. Maybe I am jaded but that is the way it seems.

 

[STEVEHOLT]

When our zone matchup is compromised by 3 point shooters or muscle inside as described above, and we know we’re vulnerable, wouldn’t it be logical to go full court press with our deep roster

If a team has great three point shooters and skilled muscle in the paint, any team in the country is going to have trouble with them...because that is a powerful team.