Is It Realistic to Hope Boeheim Adapts At All?

[BludOrange]

He's adapted over the years and that is why we now our a top 4 seed year in year out and not in the NIT or on the bubble. Sure, play our bench and lose a few more games so we can be on that bubble and have a tougher road through the bracket. I'd rather open with the C. Michigans and Coastal Carolinas than a Baylor, Dayton or NC State. Is it JB's fault the new trend in college hoops is to play in the 50's and limit posessions? I know, it was JB's fault that they called the flagrant on Cooney for making a standard move when receiving a pass. Yeah, it was JB's fault they called it a charge on Fair at Duke. I'm sure you also believe Arinze was not injured in a game, and that Boeheim whacked him with a lead pipe or something.

 

[SmilinBob]

Boeheim is the worst head coach SU mens basketball has had in the past 35 years or so.

 

[CousCuse]

Can a 70 year old black guy drive his team to win a championship , hard to imagine it .
Can a 70 year old gay guy drive his team to win a championship , hard to imagine it .
Can a 70 year old Jewish guy drive his team to win a championship , hard to imagine it .
Can a 70 year old Pollock guy drive his team to win a championship , hard to imagine it.k Archie Bunker, we get it..

Old age is an equal opportunity employer.

 

[BuffOrange]

What??

I thought it was pretty clear.
You're complaining about people second-guessing after the fact. Monday morning qb'ing.
Just pointing out that when anyone questions what we're doing before that, they get crucified.

 

[SmilinBob]

I love Boeheim about 80% of the time.

 

[RF2044]

Who recruits the players and is responsible for developing them? After all they are high school kids when they get here.

How is it possible that a selector school like Syracuse has one person on the team who is considered a "shooter"? How is it possible that 3 MickeyD AA big men couldn't contribute to the offense at all? How is it possible that we have been offensively challenged for all but one year since the Dynasty era? Yes we have been good at efficiency stats but I would argue our run outs from turn overs and Dion saving our asses mask how bad our offense has been lately. This isn't a one year thing... it's a trend that has been going on since the title with the exception being Johnny Flynn and the amazing 2010 season where the chemistry was just right. What's the common trend since the title? We have been playing pretty much exclusively zone and our coach has won many accolades from it and rightfully so. But we have no game plan on offense but the Melo iso plays which only work with Melo, the screens to free up a shooter which only work if you have shooters, and run outs off of our D which only work if you have a point guard who likes to push pace and is good in the open court. Our offensive game plan frankly stinks and if this were football the OC would be fired for it.

Boeheim and staff are responsible for recruiting--but let's be somewhat realistic. A lot of this is circumstantial. I don't think that Boeheim [or anybody] expected Triche last year or CJ this year to go from shooting a respectable % from three to shooting sub-30%. The offensive issue in 2012 wasn't lack of outside shooting [which was admittedly streaky], it was lack of low post scoring. Last year, same thing--because MCW / Triche / Southerland were all CAPABLE of shooting, they just did so inconsistently.

Shooting is a problem, but a bigger problem IMO is lack of inside scoring. Just like our ability [or lack thereof] to close out on shooters this season is a problem [whereas we were amazing at it when we peaked last year]. A problem with our offense was lack of experienced bench production, with a bunch of frosh who will probably factor in more figurally next season and give us more offensive diversity and outside shooting.

I don't agree that we have "no game plan on offense." Nonsense. I know that everybody wants to point at one thing as a magic bullet explanation, but the issues this year were multi-dimensional. As previously stated, it was the personnel more than the system.

 

[Coach Orange]

I don't agree that we have "no game plan on offense." Nonsense. I know that everybody wants to point at one thing as a magic bullet explanation, but the issues this year were multi-dimensional. As previously stated, it was the personnel more than the system.

I basically agree with this. The only thing I might add is that our player development is not producing the results one might expect from a high-level program. This season is just one example of this continuing problem.

After four seasons, CJ can't use his right hand and can rarely take more than 1-2 dribbles before fumbling the ball. BMK and Christmas are only marginally better players after seven combined seasons. Christmas still doesn't consistently seal his defender in the post and has no "go-to" offensive move in the post. He hit a few jump hooks this season, but not consistently enough to say that is a weapon. Cooney has been here for three seasons and is still little more offensively than a streaky shooter--he doesn't use fakes consistently, isn't an effective passer, and rarely reads screens well. Grant's scoring went up about four points per 40 minutes with his increased playing time, but his rebounds, assists, steals, and blocks barely increased this season based on this statistical measure.

Yes, we have seen some players make major strides in their time in the program, but it is hard to argue that our teams regularly show marked improvement throughout a single season. Moreover, for every player that seems to improve his fundamental skills throughout his time in the program, there are several others that leave here as basically older versions of the player they arrive as.

This suggests that the program's player development curriculum needs revising. Either that, or the staff needs better teachers in the assistant coaching roles.

 

[SBU72]

This question has been asked almost every year since the Richmond loss. What level of success for the program will satisfy the fan base? The overall record when I look at by itself can't be questioned. When I look at the teams we've had and the manner in which we have lost some very big games over the years, I tend to be less satisfied. I think SU has become more system-oriented in the last 5-6 years in recruiting and playing style and I think it is to our detriment.

Last night one of the TV analyst commented on all the "blue bloods" that lost over the weekend. SU was in that list. Read these posts from a lot of fan and you would think SU gets tossed from the tourney every 1st round.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

He's adapted over the years and that is why we now our a top 4 seed year in year out and not in the NIT or on the bubble.

I think that's correct. The game is adapting in an ugly way, and we have too is all.

 

[RF2044]

I basically agree with this. The only thing I might add is that our player development is not producing the results one might expect from a high-level program. This season is just one example of this continuing problem.

After four seasons, CJ can't use his right hand and can rarely take more than 1-2 dribbles before fumbling the ball. BMK and Christmas are only marginally better players after seven combined seasons. Christmas still doesn't consistently seal his defender in the post and has no "go-to" offensive move in the post. He hit a few jump hooks this season, but not consistently enough to say that is a weapon. Cooney has been here for three seasons and is still little more offensively than a streaky shooter--he doesn't use fakes consistently, isn't an effective passer, and rarely reads screens well. Grant's scoring went up about four points per 40 minutes with his increased playing time, but his rebounds, assists, steals, and blocks barely increased this season based on this statistical measure.

Yes, we have seen some players make major strides in their time in the program, but it is hard to argue that our teams regularly show marked improvement throughout a single season. Moreover, for every player that seems to improve his fundamental skills throughout his time in the program, there are several others that leave here as basically older versions of the player they arrive as.

This suggests that the program's player development curriculum needs revising. Either that, or the staff needs better teachers in the assistant coaching roles.

This is going to be unpopular, but I wouldn't mind seeing shake up of the staff. I'm a fan of Red on the recruiting trail, but with all due respect to GMac, who is a great program guy, I wouldn't mind seeing him replaced.

As you point out, player development has been, in a word, for sh/t these past few years.

 

[EnnisEnvy]

I don't think the majority of ppl bringing up the adaptation issue believe JB is a bad or unsuccessful coach. I don't believe they don't like him. I don't believe they don't think he isn't the face of SU basketball or that SU is a very successful program. I, for one, just wonder how much better we could be if, for example, we played tough man defense for 20% of the game. Of course it's all speculation but is it probable that this would cause the other team to make in-game adjustments as opposed to knowing exactly what to do every time down the floor? They don't have to prepare for ANY other defense from us. They do not have to prepare for an offensive threat in the post.

If you look at other coaches with 800+ wins at major universities and how many titles and FF they have won:

Mike K- 4/11
JB- 1/4
Bob Knight-3/5
Dean Smith-2/11
Adolph Rupp-4/6
Jim Calhoun- 3/4

Has JB underachieved? I don't know but it looks that way according to the above.

 

[RF2044]

I don't think the majority of ppl bringing up the adaptation issue believe JB is a bad or unsuccessful coach. I don't believe they don't like him. I don't believe they don't think he isn't the face of SU basketball or that SU is a very successful program. I, for one, just wonder how much better we could be if, for example, we played tough man defense for 20% of the game. Of course it's all speculation but is it probable that this would cause the other team to make in-game adjustments as opposed to knowing exactly what to do every time down the floor? They don't have to prepare for ANY other defense from us. They do not have to prepare for an offensive threat in the post.

If you look at other coaches with 800+ wins at major universities and how many titles and FF they have won:

Mike K- 4/11
JB- 1/4
Bob Knight-3/5
Dean Smith-2/11
Adolph Rupp-4/6
Jim Calhoun- 3/4

Has JB underachieved? I don't know but it looks that way according to the above.

That's why a second title would reify his already amazing achievements and would take away that criticism.

 

[EnnisEnvy]

That's why a second title would reify his already amazing achievements and would take away that criticism.

I'm not really criticizing as much as making an observation and comparison. Part of it is how one defines "success". I agree wholeheartedly that one more NC puts all the arguments to rest.

 

[NineOneSeven]

This is so hilarious. For years, JB was considered an offensive coach. Because of the zone, he's now considered a defensive coach.

I think the players had a lot more to do with our team being offensively challenged than our system.

Don't people always say that Boeheim's style on O has typically been to roll the ball out there and let them play?

During the Iowa State game, after a player nailed a three (named Thomas I want to say?), the announcer said that their coach said that was one of "their thousand or so plays". Obviously, that's an exaggeration, but the point is, he drew up a play to get a player into a spot that is said player's strength, and it was executed. Now, of course there are two sides to this- the play call and the execution. You either a) run the play and convert, b) don't run the play and don't convert, c) run the play and don't convert, d) don't run the play and hope to convert.

Option C happens- shooting 50% (a great %), still means you missed half your shots. That's fine. You can live with missed shots if you are still getting the look you intended.

If it's option B and players are not running what was designed, that's where coaching comes into play. A quick substitution to the sideline- ask why said play was not run. Basically, bench the player for a minute to get a view of the game from a different perspective (yes, this definitely helps, trust me).

The point is- imo, we didn't have nearly enough of option C, (thus even less of A), and way too much of option D. Where was the back door cuts? The baseline lobs? The pick and pops? It's simple basketball. I completely agree our players' were a large part of our challenges on offense, but I still firmly believe we didn't put all of our guys in the right position enough to make plays.

 

[orange_cream]

Its hard to win when the players who are being recruited cannot score. Syracuse is always recruiting the long athletic guys, but we see what happens when the team does not have the ability to score. I just always see teams with prolific scorers. Syracuse has had maybe 2 guys who could be considered this in the past 5 years in Wes and Dion. Before that they had Melo. Those are the Syracuse teams that win. Last year was different because they had a decent mixture of players who could do different things, but IMO they need to start recruiting more slashers.

 

[GardenOrange]

I say quit thinking so much about guys who fit the 2-3 and think more about guys who can put it in the hole. It needs to be guys who have done it against top talent in high school also.

 

[newmexicuse]

Yes, the substitution think has been discussed ad nauseum, but I have to say that this season Jimmy was hunkering down in his rotation almost from Day 1. In the past it seems we would get glimpses of the 8 thru 10 guys at least until the conference schedule started, but this year it seemed the rotation got tightened up from the third or fourth game. I know some will say it was because our games were close, but that is not necessarily so. Early in the year when we were playing well we almost always seemed to get a 10 point lead in the first half, which would have been the time to get the Sons some run. Instead, Jimmy stuck w the rotation guys and they never blew open a game so, therefore, no run for the rested.

I had made a post on Exit Interviews that didn't get much chatter going, and in that post I asked half seriously & half facetiously if the staff did self-appraisals. I am still wondering about that, does Jimmy ever look at himself post-season and ask what he might have done better ???? If so, what does he conclude ??? I would appreciate input from anybody in the know on that topic.

 

[Cuse Action]

To me there are two things that I would like to see Boeheim change, in order to evolve and learn from our failures. Both seem obvious, but he hasn't done anything about them yet.

First, how many tournament games have we lost because key players were in foul trouble or gassed, or just didn't have their shooting touch and we had no other options? As people on this board have mentioned ad nauseum, he needs to have a deeper rotation. If he took five minutes a game away from Ennis and Fair, he could spread them out and develop some other scoring options and most important, keep those guys fresh for March.

A lot of people, including JB, like to say that these guys are young kids and fatigue is overblown. I'm less concerned with fatigue and more concerned with all of the bumps and bruises that build up over the course of the season. Those wear on you, and limiting minutes a bit will limit them.

Secondly, we need more of an offensive identity. A few weeks ago I was talking to my buddies and said JB should just green light Ennis, Fair and Grant to attack the basket every time they touch the ball. Sometimes they did, but a lot of times they settled. Our opponents look lost because they can't handle the zone, but we looked lost because we had no offensive identity. This is the same thing that caused our tailspin at the end of last regular season IMO. They basically set high ball screens, the occasional pick and roll to an ineffective big, there are some off ball screens for Cooney and isos. They need more of an offense.

I know that more practice time is devoted to the zone, and I'm okay with that, but if the offense is going to be basically, "You guys are talented, here are a few plays, go use your talent," then at least have your best players attack the basket and get to the line if they aren't hitting shots.

I thought last year some of that was covered up by talent and some by getting points in transition off of turnovers, which we didn't do as much of this year.

The question is, what are the chances that Boeheim actually adapts and changes either of these things? He's gone 7 deep forever, and it's caused issues before, but he's never modified that. Likewise, he has seen our offense look stagnant the last couple of years. Surely, he's smart enough to know these are issues he could address, right?

No he won't adapt. JB is stubborn to a fault, and he dislikes change.