JBs Performance tonight

[Ghost]

I think you raise some fair points / criticisms for the way Boeheim handles some players versus others. I don't recall many (edit: any?) times that Jim ripped into Buddy for anything this year, but I can recall a couple of times over the past few seasons (edit: every single game) where he had a quick hook and some harsh words for some other guys who are not his son.

But to be fair, Buddy was essentially banished to a bench role after he started the first two games of the year (and shot the ball terribly). In games 3 thru 13, Buddy had two DNPs (against our highest-rated opponents in that stretch, Ohio State and Buffalo) and played 5 minutes or less in 5 other games (against Cornell, Georgetown, ODU, Notre Dame and Clemson). Jalen was definitely ahead of Buddy in that stretch, but he didn't do enough to capitalize on the opportunity.

Jalen will get his chance next year, and let's hope he's ready. He showed flashes of dynamic play and tremendous athleticism this year, we're all pulling for him to take it to the next level.

I find this more of a fun debate - so thank you for the civil response. I will say again, I like what we did with Buddy.

Right - our highest rated opponents. Buddy was eased into his role, we were really careful seemingly about putting him in a position to succeed - and allowed him to focus on the one and only skill he has that warrants PT in the ACC...shooting. Set shots. We didn't even make him go all Cooney and run 3,827 miles per game to get shots.

Jalen was handed a full plate - you're a primary ball handler, we can't score, we have a bunch of people that can't catch the ball well, or finish - do it up! Run the show! Show Tre Jones what you got!

He seemed kind of okay through Buffalo, and then he really struggled with his handle - no clue why, but for me, and I could be remembering wrong, after Duke he just fell apart for the rest of the year. We also went quick hook with him after that.

 

[Cuse Action]

You are right in my opinion. Teams have to be able to play both defenses these days. There are too many teams with multiple 3-point shooters to play zone 100% of the time. But we know JB will not change. So it's either live with it or get rid of him. And it's rather hard to fire a HOF coach.

The fact that he is in the HOF should not make him immune to criticism. He will not change, he is a very stubborn guy. We are looking at three more years of mediocrity.

 

[IthacaMatt]

He has his 7, and plays his 7, all other circumstances be damned.
That’s why we’re always one injury, suspension, or unforeseen circumstance away from a flushed season. There is no backup plan: just 2-3 zone and 7 man rotation. When it works, and it has the majority of the 40+ years, it can be magic. When it doesn’t, whether due to chemistry, injuries, bad luck or whatever, we get nights/seasons like this. Rinse and repeat.

Really it's usually 8. He can only get away with playing 7 if he has 2 or 3 guys who can play multiple positions.

 

[Newhouser]

The season statistics suggest he likely would’ve played slightly better defense and much worse offense.

Season statistics would have had Baylor missing some of the 3's they made. Sometimes individual games dictate different measures.

 

[Newhouser]

It's amazing this is so hard to grasp

Hold on - you nor anyone on this board knows JB's emotions in terms of Buddy and his playing here. I get the point that Carey's sample size is brutal and Buddy had been playing better - but what I can't "grasp" is how people can blindly say - JB's role of father didn't impact Buddy getting a long leash last night. We don't know how JB thinks or feels and for the record we are talking about sitting Buddy who is not Feshman year Lawrence Moten in terms of production.

 

[OttoMets]

When have you ever seen JB leave a player out there when they are constantly missing assignments on defense and late on rotations? ...

Kris Geeeeeeeeoseph!

 

[BillSU]

Maybe the worst game I’ve seen him coach. The fact he just let buddy get abused all night on D while giving us absolutely nothing on offense was a killer. Every time down they attacked him. He’s going to be a good player for us and I’m a fan but he shouldn’t have played 40 mins. Huge reason we lost.

Everyone on this board has a right to their opinion. I don't agree with yours. Buddy had a poor night and he's a freshman on a huge stage. We needed more balanced scoring other than EH, TB, OB's 55 to the rest of the teams 14 but no one was there to provide it. Buddy looked lost and afraid to take a shot.. Not JB's problem if his son can't get shot off - as it was he was 0-4 from 3 a reason he was passing the ball to those who were scoring. One of our best games shooting the 3 ball this season and others. GOSU

 

[Day2]

Jalen Carey should have played about 8-10 minutes, and maybe everybody wouldn't have been so damn winded because of the altitude for the last 5-10 minutes of the game.

Yeah, but maybe we're down 15 because he's turning the ball over every other possession.

 

[Day2]

Reading some of the responses in this thread and others, you would think everyone was talking about the Oklahoma/Ole Miss game.

 

[orangeinnyc]

Everyone on this board has a right to their opinion. I don't agree with yours. Buddy had a poor night and he's a freshman on a huge stage. We needed more balanced scoring other than EH, TB, OB's 55 to the rest of the teams 14 but no one was there to provide it. Buddy looked lost and afraid to take a shot.. Not JB's problem if his son can't get shot off - as it was he was 0-4 from 3 a reason he was passing the ball to those who were scoring. One of our best games shooting the 3 ball this season and others. GOSU

Totally fine if you dont agree, but your proving my point in your response. You said it yourself buddy was lost and afraid to take a shot, so why should he play almost the whole game? As a coach you have to notice that. He also had to notice (which he addressed in the presser) buddy getting absolutely torched on D. He is the man in charge of substituting. This is where I think he had a poor performance, he left buddy in to get roasted on D while making no contribution on O. I don't care if its his son or not, I thought Carey should have at least spelled him for a little bit. Also I think buddy is going to be a tremdous player for us and thought he had a very good freshman season, but he just didn't have it last night. We got a total of 2 points from our starting 2g who played almost 40 mins while he got abused on D. That's a major reason we lost.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Yeah, but maybe we're down 15 because he's turning the ball over every other possession.

Yes, he made a turnover. He's a talented player.
Sometimes you have to let players play in order to get better.

Do you think that Fab Melo would have been the best rim protector in America his sophomore year based off of how terrible he did as a frosh? Maybe if Boeheim played him more, he would have developed faster.

Do you think that Michael Carter-Williams, the NBA Rookie of the Year following his sophomore year, was truly so bad as a frosh that he shouldn't play, or do you think that Boeheim is perhaps too risk averse with his younger players, and as a result, doesn't get as much out of their talent as quickly as other coaches might, if they let them play through their mistakes and learn from it?

 

[Zelda Zonk]

There are 5 coaches 70 or older in including Coach K. Should they all retire. How about Leonard Hamilton of Florida St. He (69) and 8 others are 65+. There are 38 D1 coaches over 60. Do you think there should be a mandatory retirement age

Did you even read the post to which I was responding?
“...he needs to coach better.”
How many of those coaches over 70 are doing more/recruiting harder and wider/learning new tricks/evolving?

And I said “70,” not 60. Don’t move my goalposts. And maybe maybe Alan Arkin reference should have been a clue that my post wasn’t 100% serious. And you can’t compare K because he gets far better talent. And... and... and...

 

[Day2]

Yes, he made a turnover. He's a talented player.
Sometimes you have to let players play in order to get better.

Do you think that Fab Melo would have been the best rim protector in America his sophomore year based off of how terrible he did as a frosh? Maybe if Boeheim played him more, he would have developed faster.

Do you think that Michael Carter-Williams, the NBA Rookie of the Year following his sophomore year, was truly so bad as a frosh that he shouldn't play, or do you think that Boeheim is perhaps too risk averse with his younger players, and as a result, doesn't get as much out of their talent as quickly as other coaches might, if they let them play through their mistakes and learn from it?

Fab Melo started (almost?) every game as a freshman.

Minutes are earned. Plenty of freshmen have played significant minutes under JB. In this case, we’re talking about one frosh playing over another. Buddy showed over the course of the season that he deserved to play over Carey, who was given numerous opportunities and failed to correct his mistakes. Including last night.

 

[orangeinnyc]

Did you even read the post to which I was responding?
“...he needs to coach better.”
How many of those coaches over 70 are doing more/recruiting harder and wider/learning new tricks/evolving?

And I said “70,” not 60. Don’t move my goalposts. And maybe maybe Alan Arkin reference should have been a clue that my post wasn’t 100% serious. And you can’t compare K because he gets far better talent. And... and... and...

I still don't get what age has to do with your argument. He's a hall of fame coach, he should be held to a high standard. Just like players have off nights i think Jimmy had one last night. If you disagree with me that's fine but I thought he should have been better recognizing substitutions and given Carey a bit more burn. Nothing you said refuted that, just a weird comment about alan arkin and listing an age.

 

[malpearl31]

I find this more of a fun debate - so thank you for the civil response. I will say again, I like what we did with Buddy.

Right - our highest rated opponents. Buddy was eased into his role, we were really careful seemingly about putting him in a position to succeed - and allowed him to focus on the one and only skill he has that warrants PT in the ACC...shooting. Set shots. We didn't even make him go all Cooney and run 3,827 miles per game to get shots.

Jalen was handed a full plate - you're a primary ball handler, we can't score, we have a bunch of people that can't catch the ball well, or finish - do it up! Run the show! Show Tre Jones what you got!

He seemed kind of okay through Buffalo, and then he really struggled with his handle - no clue why, but for me, and I could be remembering wrong, after Duke he just fell apart for the rest of the year. We also went quick hook with him after that.

Buddy did start the first 2 games of the season over Jalen, which takes a little bit away from your argument, but I get what you’re saying.

Looking back at it, I think the Georgia Tech game (right before Duke) was the turning point In the Jalen/Buddy story. Jalen was terrible against GT (4 turnovers in 12 minutes), while Buddy helped keep us somewhat in the game with three 3-pters (a season high for him at that point). When Jalen followed that up with an equally miserable performance the next game against Duke (another 3 turnovers in just 7 minutes), Boeheim benched him the next time out (vs Pitt) and Buddy stepped in with four 3-pters and a season-high 13 points. From that point forward, Buddy was clearly ahead in the rotation.

The other thing that hardly ever gets talked about (because most of us really don’t know) is how much practice factors into all of this. If Jalen struggled to take care of the ball and knock down open jumpers in practice, you could see Boeheim deciding to have a short leash on him during game action. Obviously I am speculating here (I am not an insider by any means), but it just doesn’t make sense to me that a guy like Jalen would be dominating or even playing well in practice but Boeheim just doesn’t play him. I think all Jim cares about is getting Ws, and he’ll play whoever he thinks gives him the best chance to do so. I also think it’s very fair to be critical of Boeheim for failing to develop bench guys at times - I think that ties back into his desire to win the game that’s right in front of him...

 

[BillSU]

Totally fine if you dont agree, but your proving my point in your response. You said it yourself buddy was lost and afraid to take a shot, so why should he play almost the whole game? As a coach you have to notice that. He also had to notice (which he addressed in the presser) buddy getting absolutely torched on D. He is the man in charge of substituting. This is where I think he had a poor performance, he left buddy in to get roasted on D while making no contribution on O. I don't care if its his son or not, I thought Carey should have at least spelled him for a little bit. Also I think buddy is going to be a tremdous player for us and thought he had a very good freshman season, but he just didn't have it last night. We got a total of 2 points from our starting 2g who played almost 40 mins while he got abused on D. That's a major reason we lost.

I realize it's fine to disagree that's what this board is, civil discussions, people having different opinions, etc., but
who are you going to bring in? Who else was going to contribute from the bench? Howard wasn't there.
What's your suggestion? Yes BB may be a very good player for us, just not last night. But he was the next best player we had. He was cold which is too bad because we needed him to be hot. JB was probably hoping for him to get open and hit some 3' like he's done before. What do we gain by taking him out? Again I'll ask you who are you bringing in to spell Buddy who could score? What is your solution for last night? The best we had were in. Usually BB has space but last night he was guarded closely and hardly had room to shoot. We did the best we could last night with the players we had. Listen to JB's presser post game. Or is your point fire/retire the coach - good luck with that.

 

[tbonezone]

buddy is the better shooter. but let's not pretend that he's as adept at ball handling or defending as jalen. 2 different skill sets. sure we always need shooters. but sometimes we need defenders as well.

 

[Zelda Zonk]

I still don't get what age has to do with your argument. He's a hall of fame coach, he should be held to a high standard. Just like players have off nights i think Jimmy had one last night. If you disagree with me that's fine but I thought he should have been better recognizing substitutions and given Carey a bit more burn. Nothing you said refuted that, just a weird comment about alan arkin and listing an age.

I'm not sure how to make this more clear.

The post i responded to suggested there's nothing 'wrong' with JB—he just needs to coach better. My reply suggested it's uncommon to find anyone in any field who improves so late in life. So, whether you consider last night to be one "off night" for the coach, or whether you consider the season/the last four seasons to be an 'off era' for the coach, i'm not sure why anyone would believe JB is going to actually be 'coaching better' going forward. He is what he is, and he's stubborn and resistant to change, and all i foresee is decline.

Again, there are simple questions: who expects JB to actually exert more effort now than he did 10-15 years ago? Who expects JB to all of a sudden transform into a coach willing to embrace (and then teach) supplemental defensive schemes. Or offensive schemes? What does 'coach better' mean to You? Sorry you didn't get the Arkin quip. I recommend you watch The Kominsky Method on Netflix, though, as an aside.

As for 'holding JB to a high standard,' we agree. I'm not going to rant on his decisionmaking last night. My criticisms are more long-term. We were dealt a bad hand with Frank's suspension. I don't love how much time Buddy was given was... 'odd,' given the lack of success, but Jalen has proven to be a trainwreck at every opportunity, and it was more likely Buddy would suddenly catch fire than Jalen would be UConnJalen.

 

[kingtidge]

I find this more of a fun debate - so thank you for the civil response. I will say again, I like what we did with Buddy.

Right - our highest rated opponents. Buddy was eased into his role, we were really careful seemingly about putting him in a position to succeed - and allowed him to focus on the one and only skill he has that warrants PT in the ACC...shooting. Set shots. We didn't even make him go all Cooney and run 3,827 miles per game to get shots.

Jalen was handed a full plate - you're a primary ball handler, we can't score, we have a bunch of people that can't catch the ball well, or finish - do it up! Run the show! Show Tre Jones what you got!

He seemed kind of okay through Buffalo, and then he really struggled with his handle - no clue why, but for me, and I could be remembering wrong, after Duke he just fell apart for the rest of the year. We also went quick hook with him after that.

He looks like a kid that has always been faster than everybody and has run around defenders with ease.

Now he's in the ACC and facing P5 guards that are equally fast and they stay in front of him... pick his pocket or draw charges on him because he hasn't figured out that he can't beat them on speed alone.

In other words, he needs development.

There may be a very good player in there, but he's going to need coaching.

Very few freshmen point guards could step into the role in our current squad - bigs with no hands, etc., and succeed on day 1.

 

[DoctorBombay]

My likely not-so-final thoughts on the Buddy vs. Carey debate that's ebbed and flowed depending on whether Buddy hits six threes in a game.

I love the way we handled Buddy. Love it.

That being said, have we ever seen a Frosh that more consideration was given to in ensuring he doesn't fail? I kind of want that for everyone.

Buddy can do all of about one thing well enough to warrant playing time, and we said, "do that well, and you get minutes! Even if you don't do that well, and you're abysmal shooting the ball early in the year, we'll stick with you until you do succeed in that one thing, because that's why we recruited you!"

We didn't even play him against Va Tech because he wouldn't be able to handle ball pressure. We wouldn't let him fail, or get frazzled...but we would throw Carey in against Duke, at Cameron, at PG, against Jones (whom Jay Bilas informed me is the world's greatest defensive PG), and then glue him to the bench. I don't know...I'm not sure we would do that to Buddy at that juncture.

When Buddy's defense was awful, it was fine. When a team suddenly pressed earlier in the year and he seemed like a deer in headlights - it was fine. We let him focus on that one thing - set shots. He could expand his role based on his own development...it was sort of unique to see with this program.

I don't know. I feel like Buddy is the first Frosh in awhile that we really made a concerted effort to develop through the year despite early season struggles, and always placed him in positions where he could succeed and build confidence...everyone else just gets handed a full plate, and if one item - fork, knife, spoon, shaky potatoes, falls off the plate...we just compound the problem.

Carey sucked, but if we want to talk stats, they shot the same in HS from three, did we consider just using Carey as a set-shot three point shooter, that could be more a disruptive force on defense? Would we have allowed him to start the season shooting like that if we did give him that role? I could be wrong...but it just seems like we took a different path with Buddy, one I prefer, but I feel like we won't see again.

It's going to go back to, are you ready to be thrown in the fire from day one, or not?

If so, great!

If not, screw off - we have no time to build your confidence!

To reiterate, I LIKE the way we handled Buddy, but I think it was an anomaly. I think normally we just say, "do it all, and do it all well, you get a few chances, and then hit the bench if you fail." Whereas, Buddy we seemed to just pick his strength and cater very much to it to help him develop and ease into his role so we had a better, more mature player at the end of the year and not some frantic Frosh that still was playing with jitters.

Anyway.../rant

Agree with about 90% of this excellent post- all except for the insinuation that Buddy received preferential treatment due to nepotism or the like. I do not believe that. However, the part about nurturing a freshman and allowing them to work/play thru their mistakes in the hope that you’ll have a more confident, secure player by March, I wholeheartedly agree with.
IMHO, JB does not develop bench depth strength- a shortcoming that’s come back to bite us a few times.
Carey wasn’t doing faceplants early on, certainly not enough for numerous DNP’s along the way. I just think the big picture has to come into play during the season, in that you’ve got to have more patience w/ struggling frosh. To me it’s just common sense.

 

[CardiacCuse]

Carey was terrible at the top of the zone all year. In the Baylor game he allowed 2 triples one from the top of the key that we should never give up in the limited time he played.

you're right...that's why "freshman guard" was apropos and not just "Buddy" at the top of the defense being the problem. carey was bad too in the zone defense.

almost the whole team seemed to not know how to rotate in the zone which makes zero sense to me ...even dolzaj and brissett were making bad reads/giving up easy buckets...sooo many wide open 3s/layups...

the players are not playing freely...they don't know what to do or where to go sometimes...WHICH IS THE POINT OF STICKING TO ONE DEFENSE...that way you know it SO WELL that it is a well-oiled machine...

in this game it was like they were trying it anew...really odd.

low BBALL IQ?

the thing that makes me think it is indeed the scheme and not the players...is that they have very high metrics in blocks and steals...that shows they have awareness and defensive acumen...and leads me to beleive they just don't fully grasp the complexities of what they are supposed to do on the court...superior athletes are being straitjacketed by the scheme that allows opponents to score in ways they couldnt if the mental breakdowns didnt let them...SOOO MANY TIMES this season...an opponent would somehow slither out of a bad situation and into an easy score etc...it happens too frequently...opponents FEASTED on mental breakdowns prolifically this year...which to me is damning of the defensive scheme. period.

sooo...SIMPLIFY it for these guys if they dont get it...scheme for them and who they are...instead of forcing them into a scheme they do not fit.

Jalen Carey strikes me as the type who could be a monster lock down 1 on 1 defender - put him in mason's grill, i doubt he did what he did in that game.

 

[CardiacCuse]

We didn't have other options.

plenty...coulda played hughes and battle as the gaurds

get more size in vs a small baylor...marek and brissettt as the forwards...same as last years better team.

all you woulda done was replace frabnk wth elijah

 

[OrangeDW]

plenty...coulda played hughes and battle as the gaurds

Why do people keep saying this about Hughes?

He’s not a guard, and didn’t play guard this season.

 

[CardiacCuse]

Why do people keep saying this about Hughes?

He’s not a guard, and didn’t play guard this season.

he dribbled the ball up the court some...woulda been better than buddy at the 2.
AND woulda allowed more size in the front court...AND woulda been the same front line as last years sweet 16 squad. marek-ob-chukwu-battle-hughes is the lineup i wanted and posted that i wanted to see before the game...AND would you honestly not want that now if you go back and could see it?????

baylor had their season high in 3s and all time tourney record in 3s and some players had career/season highs in shooting...elijah at the 2 couldnt have been any worse than that!!!! and it woulda been better on offense!!!!!! than 2 points 0 for 6...while allowing more minutes for dolezaj...no-brainer.

heck, i'd rather have seen that and seen what braswell could do...than 39 minutes of that defense.

 

[tbonezone]

putting your left shoe on your right foot and vice versa is a change. but it don't mean you're gonna run faster. same with changing player position. they're a fit at a spot for a reason.