Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="OttoinGrotto, post: 3297948, member: 297"]
I get why he doesn't believe them.

For his entire career part of his competitive edge has been his intuitive sense for the game and what matters. It was a trait unique to him and his brain. There's absolutely zero way he could explain why certain things were true about basketball, they just were, and it was self-evident and known to him. And those facts manifested themselves in his winning record.

Now, some nerds come along and have cracked that code. Add on to it that analytics just kinda seem punitive and feel like the stats want to be a dick to players depending on the story told with them, and then it's his son under the microscope, and some dissonance sets in, because the thing is - that intuitive Boeheim sense is fully aware of Buddy's limitations, but in his calculus, he's decided on the net Buddy is worth it, and that's what matters, how the math gets you there doesn't. But certain analytics look at things much more granularly, and part of Boeheim's wizardry is that he can cut to the chase on all of that. And he doesn't really want to deal with your crap, Pomery and Synergy, because sure, maybe you have some analytical insights... but you don't win basketball games like Jim Boeheim does. Andohbythewayleavemysonoutofthis.

I think that's where he's coming from, and I get it.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?