Is this a Roberts/Watkins frontcourt?

[OrangeMuskyFish]

You guys are forgetting Etan! He was by far our best defensive center!

um, sherm I think Etan was mentioned in at least a couple posts.

 

[PeteCalvin]

Melo showed a nice touch out to 15 feet and Keita hit a hook shot.

+1

Anyone who compares this frontcourt to the Watkins/Roberts team didn't watch last nights game. Also, Watkins was not as bad as people make him out to be. He could score without dunking. Right now Soph Fab and Frosh Christmas are already better offensively than Mookie and Terrance were AS SENIORS. T-Rob, minus that 3 pointer to beat Rutgers, could NOT score unless he hung on the rim. Christmas showed us last night that he can be dangerous as a weak side garbage man. He also looks more comfortable with the ball than T-Rob ever did. And if Fab can hit those 8-10 footers with any regularity, he is going to open up that lane so wide that the other guys will be abusing the rim at will.

By BE time, we could have a very formidable offensive frontcourt. If Christmas could put the ball on the floor and make a baseline move, that would cement it. That is something that DC, JDub, Melo, Hak, etc., could do.

 

[bevosu]

To me Watkins/Roberts=Frustration

 

[hungrychuck]

um, sherm I think Etan was mentioned in at least a couple posts.

He was, and the wrong conclusion was reached. He WAS our best defensive center, far better than Watkins.

Sometimes things are as they appear to be.

 

[SoBeCuse]

What I mean by that is, is this a frontcourt with fantastic athletes that will score exclusively on dunks and put-backs? Who out of Fab/Xmas/Keita (I didn't watch last night's game so I'm legitimately curious) can be fed the ball in the post and score on a short jump hook when outside shots are not falling?

During our elite seasons... 1987, 1989, 1990, 1996, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2010, etc. we've had that presence. Who on this roster can back a Big East defender down and score consistently?

Valid question. Don't know the answer. We shall see with better competition I suppose. I guess with good position defense, rebounding, and serviceable offense then I'm ok with the Mookie/Roberts scenario. I just hope Fab will be able to stay in the game and not foul out. As long as he stops biting on those pump fakes then we'll be fine.

 

[Eric15]

Anyone who compares this frontcourt to the Watkins/Roberts team didn't watch last nights game.

I love your positive outlook and obviously want you to be right, but is it possible that you're putting too much stock into a game against an opponent that is comparable to LeMoyne?

For example, I remember leaving the Dome in November 2003 being completely convinced that Roberts was the next Derrick Coleman.

 

[RF2044]

He was, and the wrong conclusion was reached. He WAS our best defensive center, far better than Watkins.

Sometimes things are as they appear to be.

Wrong. Shot blocking is one of the most misunderstood aspects of defensive play, and people often mistakenly equate shotblocking with good defensive play, when in fact it is often a last resort or comes as a function of weakside / help defense on other players.

Make no mistake: Etan Thomas was the BEST shotblocker I have ever seen at SU, bar none. Watkins was certainly above average as a shotblocker, but not in Dedrick's league. But in terms of other aspects of defensive play, Watkins was much better.

 

[SoBeCuse]

Wrong. Shot blocking is one of the most misunderstood aspects of defensive play, and people often mistakenly equate shotblocking with good defensive play, when in fact it is often a last resort or comes as a function of weakside / help defense on other players.

Make no mistake: Etan Thomas was the BEST shotblocker I have ever seen at SU, bar none. Watkins was certainly above average as a shotblocker, but not in Dedrick's league. But in terms of other aspects of defensive play, Watkins was much better.

Yep. I still remember the 2006 BET. That championship game vs Pitt was a defensive clinic put on by Mookie. Roberts too.

 

[General20]

Wrong. Shot blocking is one of the most misunderstood aspects of defensive play, and people often mistakenly equate shotblocking with good defensive play, when in fact it is often a last resort or comes as a function of weakside / help defense on other players.

Make no mistake: Etan Thomas was the BEST shotblocker I have ever seen at SU, bar none. Watkins was certainly above average as a shotblocker, but not in Dedrick's league. But in terms of other aspects of defensive play, Watkins was much better.

Gotta agree with you. Watkins was an elite defender and an elite athlete. By his senior year he also had some pretty unstoppable post moves around the basket. His problem was, he had terrible hands, so he wasn't much of a rebounder, and for every post up score he had he caused about three turnovers because he couldn't catch the ball.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

Sorry, but I never thought so.

You would be wrong... and there more than a few guys that would really disagree. We have had some pretty good big guys that have developed quite nicely over the last 20-25 years. Seikaly was a mess when he showed up here, he left essentially a finished product, Alexis, Mookie,Etan, Rick, the list goes on and on.

That statement is like saying George Deleone is a bad O Line guy, people can love him or hate him but the fact is both of these guys are very well respected for their specific areas. Countless coaches would disagree with you as well.

But hey everyone is entitled to their opinion and I mean that, god knows I have some whacky ones

 

[OttoMets]

Wrong. Shot blocking is one of the most misunderstood aspects of defensive play, and people often mistakenly equate shotblocking with good defensive play, when in fact it is often a last resort or comes as a function of weakside / help defense on other players.

To wit: the board posters who insist that Donte Greene was an above-average defender and point to his blocks-per-game average as evidence.

Etan was good. Mookie was very good. I remember sitting around in November 2004 with a couple kids who'd played AAU ball with Mookie, boldly predicting that he was going to take 25 of Craig Forth's minutes for the rest of the year and that we were a lock for the Final Four in St. Louis. They told me that Watkins was as offensively soft and passive as anyone they played against. Might've been a little hyperbolic, but he got hurt a month later, missed half a dozen games, and didn't contribute much (except for nearly single-handedly beating UConn in the conference semi-finals). We didn't make our Final Four, and Mookie's offensive game never took off like I thought it did. But he did develop into one of the best defenders in the league.

 

[SoBeCuse]

There is a reason he was getting invites to NBA camps the last few years. It ain't his offense that's for sure.

 

[billsin01]

Accordingly, players like AO, Otis, and Etan made a much bigger impact offensively. No argument there.

But none of those guys were in the same league as Watkins defensively--which is the point we were debating above.

I liked Watkins -- though he was a bit disappointing on the offensive end -- but RF you aren't really intending to suggest that he was better than Etan defensively are you? He finished up averaging a full block less per game than Etan. I know blocks aren't the end-all or be-all, but that's a huge difference.

I don't know, I remember Etan making basically any shot within 7 or 8 feet and absolute adventure for most opponents and I remember Mookie doing that for a year -- as a senior. Nice player but I think Etan -- in addition to being far better offensively -- was the better defensive player.

 

[Orangeyes]

To me Watkins/Roberts=Frustration

Half of the Fab Four, Louie & DNic were the others.

 

[Eric15]

Half of the Fab Four, Louie & DNic were the others.

DNic was only frustrating his first two seasons. By his junior year, he was establishing himself as one of the better scoring small forwards in recent memory at SU.

Louie: agree 100%. He and Elvir are probably the two most frustrating players in SU history.

 

[RF2044]

I liked Watkins -- though he was a bit disappointing on the offensive end -- but RF you aren't really intending to suggest that he was better than Etan defensively are you? He finished up averaging a full block less per game than Etan. I know blocks aren't the end-all or be-all, but that's a huge difference.

I don't know, I remember Etan making basically any shot within 7 or 8 feet and absolute adventure for most opponents and I remember Mookie doing that for a year -- as a senior. Nice player but I think Etan -- in addition to being far better offensively -- was the better defensive player.

That's absolutely what I'm suggesting--and I agree with General20 and OttoMets above when they suggest that Watkins was a superior defender. You are right when you suggest that playing defense is much more than just about blocked shot.

Sometimes, I think people get confused about the 5's defensive responsibilities since we predominantly play zone. In our system, pivots primarily are there to clog space, to deter penetration, and to step up and cover the foul line extended when the opposing team works the ball inside past the perimeter defenders. That's typically all we ask our big guys to do. Some have better shot blocking aptitude than others [Etan, Rick, McNeil, McRae, etc.] and are able to make up for teammates' defensive lapses by providing weakside help or [to quote Bill Raftery] negating attempts with a timely blocked shot to bail out the defensive breakdown. Others are bigger bodied, and are better space-eaters to clog the middle [Forth, AO, Otis, etc.].

Where Watkins excelled compared to many of the names listed above was that he was capable of bodying up and playing his man one-on-one, while still fulfilling his zone defensive responsibilities. He had to play some beasts in the paint during his time at SU--guys like Aaron Gray was a load who overpowered most players his senior year. He couldn't do that to Watkins, who routinely held him in check. Ditto Hibbert from Georgetown, who was a mountain that would overpower most smaller defenders. He couldn't do that to Watkins. And those SU teams Watkins started on his final two years were relatively poor defensively, so in addition to having his hands full in the middle, he also was called upon frequently to be the last line of defense when someone ole'd their repsonsibility.

Thomas was the best shot blocker at SU I've ever seen [with apologies to Roosevelt Bouie, who was a bit ahead of my time], hands down, bar none. But he didn't have a great instinctive feel for the game in other respects, which meant that despite being an incredible athlete, he was very mechanical in how he played in every facet of the game besides shot blocking. Which also meant that he was prone to getting caught floating and didn't anticipate where the ball was going well. Now, he could make up for that many times with superlative shot blocking aptitude, but pound for pound Watkins was the better defensive player--and probably the best defensive center we've ever had.

I agree 100% with General20 above, characterizing it as elite defensive aptitude. That doesn't mean that he was a "great" player or that he was as good in other dimensions of the game--he wasn't--or that he was as good as some of the other centers we've had. But on defensive ability alone, he was on a different level than the other centers we've had.

 

[billsin01]

Sometimes, I think people get confused about the 5's defensive responsibilities since we predominantly play zone. In our system, pivots primarily are there to clog space, to deter penetration, and to step up and cover the foul line extended when the opposing team works the ball inside past the perimeter defenders. That's typically all we ask our big guys to do. Some have better shot blocking aptitude than others [Etan, Rick, McNeil, McRae, etc.] and are able to make up for teammates' defensive lapses by providing weakside help or [to quote Bill Raftery] negating attempts with a timely blocked shot to bail out the defensive breakdown. Others are bigger bodied, and are better space-eaters to clog the middle [Forth, AO, Otis, etc.].

Where Watkins excelled compared to many of the names listed above was that he was capable of bodying up and playing his man one-on-one, while still fulfilling his zone defensive responsibilities. He had to play some beasts in the paint during his time at SU--guys like Aaron Gray was a load who overpowered most players his senior year. He couldn't do that to Watkins, who routinely held him in check. Ditto Hibbert from Georgetown, who was a mountain that would overpower most smaller defenders.

Fair enough. Your stance is certainly well-reasoned. I suppose I just see it differently. For one, I don't know that I will grant the point on Gray and Hibbert because any big man who's ever played the middle in the Big East has faced beasts and -- though I don't feel like looking up Etan's contemporaries b/c I'm lazy -- I'm sure Etan was up to the task for the most part. I also don't know exactly what I think of Hibbert in general -- the zone was going to be tough for him to exploit given his relative lack of quickness and range. But I agree, Mookie did a great job on both players.

Secondly, I'm not entirely sure I agree with your argument that Watkins should get credit for playing on a team that otherwise wasn't great defensively. I mean, Etan was part of a couple of the best defensive teams we've put on the floor in the last 20 years. I tend to think he should get a pretty big part of the credit for that since he was voted BE Most Outstanding Defensive Player. I get what you're saying but I just don't know that I can really give Watkins extra points for that.

And, finally, I agree with your general point on the varied roles for the man in the middle defensively in the zone but I have a tough time believing that we ever have a better defense than we do when we have an agile shot-blocker in the middle or a couple on the back line. Wes Johnson was basically terrible in the zone but he was disrupting none-the-less b/c he was long and blocked a ton of shots. So while I think Etan did a nice job of challenging the free throw area and still holding his own on the defensive glass, I just tend to weight shot-blocking ability far more heavily than any other quality for a big man in our zone.

On that, I'm sure we disagree, which is fine. I get your point and I would say Mookie was an outstanding defensive center, but I have a very hard time putting him above Etan, IMO.

 

[CUSEBB1]

Etan Thomas = my favorite player.I think the dude worked his arse off.

 

[Knicks411]

People forget in retrospect, but the Roberts / Watkins teams, especially their junior & senior year, was some of the best interior defending teams we have had in a very long time.

Yeah, they were really great defensively. In 2007, we had the #2 2 point FG% defense in the country. Mookie was 13th in the country in block rate, and Terrence was in the top 200. Really intimidating. By the same token, they were part of the reason we were barely inside the top 50 offensively.

 

[hungrychuck]

Wrong. Shot blocking is one of the most misunderstood aspects of defensive play, and people often mistakenly equate shotblocking with good defensive play, when in fact it is often a last resort or comes as a function of weakside / help defense on other players.

Make no mistake: Etan Thomas was the BEST shotblocker I have ever seen at SU, bar none. Watkins was certainly above average as a shotblocker, but not in Dedrick's league. But in terms of other aspects of defensive play, Watkins was much better.

Actually, you're wrong. I had the opportunity, purely by chance, to take in one of the last games in DW's Syracuse career in the company of an NBA scout. I will never post something that embarrasses a current or former SU player.

Let's just say there are differences between the evaluation of someone who knows basketball and someone who claims to know basketball.

BTW, which player has had an NBA career?

 

[IthacaMatt]

I think the only center during those years who had a back-to-the-basket game was Rony Seikaly, and then Coleman, of course when he was moved to center.

 

[RF2044]

Actually, you're wrong. I had the opportunity, purely by chance, to take in one of the last games in DW's Syracuse career in the company of an NBA scout. I will never post something that embarrasses a current or former SU player.

Let's just say there are differences between the evaluation of someone who knows basketball and someone who claims to know basketball.

BTW, which player has had an NBA career?

And there's an even bigger difference between someone who knows basketball and someone who doesn't understand the premise of what's being discussed.

Nobody in this thread that Watkins was a better player than Etan, only that he was a better one-on-one defender.

Feel free to pass along what the scout had to say about Watkins's defense.

 

[RF2044]

I just tend to weight shot-blocking ability far more heavily than any other quality for a big man in our zone.

Using shot blocking stats as the primary way to gauge defensive play is a lot like looking at Arinze Onuaku's field goal percentage and concluding that he was a good shooter.

Anyway--interesting discussion.

 

[Knicks411]

And there's an even bigger difference between someone who knows basketball and someone who doesn't understand the premise of what's being discussed.

Nobody in this thread that Watkins was a better player than Etan, only that he was a better one-on-one defender.

The only thing I'd say about that is Etan was primarily in the league for his defense, and he played for a lot longer than Mookie did. So it does seem like most NBA teams agreed Etan was a better defender. Which doesn't make it so, of course.

On an unrelated note, I always had it in my mind Etan was like 6-8. ESPN has him at 6-10, 260. I don't know why i thought he was smaller.

 

[hungrychuck]

The only thing I'd say about that is Etan was primarily in the league for his defense, and he played for a lot longer than Mookie did. So it does seem like most NBA teams agreed Etan was a better defender. Which doesn't make it so, of course.

On an unrelated note, I always had it in my mind Etan was like 6-8. ESPN has him at 6-10, 260. I don't know why i thought he was smaller.

Bingo.

That's actually a premise that's pretty easy to understand.