Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="OrangeinDC, post: 3740174, member: 921"]
To me... Andy was more athletic, had a better handle and played lower which allowed him to get in the paint more, that and pts off the break from steals ( He was a lot more active on Defense) that's what got him more 2 pointers.  His scoring was not as dependent on the 3 as Buddy nor Cooney IMO.  .

Cooney was more limited with his dribble and to me, spent too much time over his career hunting the 3 ball.   That being said, he had really good hands and feet which allowed him to get steals and get out on the break to score.   I think his " 2 point " game wasn't bad, but he left something on the table as far as growth to me.  Cooney's shoot was not as nice as Buddy or Andy's, but he got more 2 point opportunities from his defense than Buddy (not so sure about Andy).

I think they were both better off the dribble than Buddy and scored more 2 pointers because of steals overall (could be wrong).

Buddy has the best looking shot of the 3 and the most potential to go for 20+ if his shot is falling.

They could all be locked down though!
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?