Jimmy's Stubbornness...

[Briancuse]

Was that pre- or post-arrival on campus?

After Fab's freshman year, what odds would you have given that he'd be a first round pick after his sophomore year?

As I said, my opinion.

Don't think JB anticipated MCW being gone.

Less certain about Fab Melo and Dion as seniors.

Considering fab is a 7 footer, I would say pretty good.

I agree on Mcw, I don't think JB expected him to leave after last year.

 

[anomander]

Stop. You just shot yourself in the head.

350 D1 programs - a handful that can be considered better than ours...

That is not underachieving. That is rarified air.

Unbelievable how you take our program's success for granted.

This board is degenerating into Syracuse.com and I have lost patience with this drivel.

I'm not saying he isn't great for our program, and has the program running at an all time high level. Overall we are in very good shape, but that still doesn't hide the fact that when it really matters we have underachieved. I know i'm not the first person to say this. You can have it both ways. No way am i calling for Boeheim to resign or anything ridiculous like that, but other then the past couple of years our post season results have fallen far below what anyone would have expected for such a great program. I really don't think I need to re-hatch all of our March failures do i?

This goes back to the OP and Boeheim's stubbornness. In my post I pointed to the reason I believe we have underachieved in the post season. I don't think that's too harsh?

 

[GardenOrange]

2013 - Final Four
2012 - Elite Eight ex Fab Melo
2011 - Round of 32
2010 - Sweet Sixteen ex Onuaku
2009 - Sweet Sixteen

Five Year Record - 147 - 30

173 - 34 if you include this year...

Yeah, you're right, this coaching staff can't coach and JB is over-the-hill. Fire 'em all. Who has Dave Bliss' phone number?

I am speaking strictly about the freshmen contribution to the team and the apparent lack of developing them as quickly as some other big time basketball playing schools do. It is not an indictment of the coaching staff in general. Why is it so taboo to level any kind of criticism at Jim or his staff? Not calling for anybody's head.

 

[OrangeSky]

It's been alluded to already in this thread, but I believe part of the reason our bench wasn't played/developed more is because we had so many close games. Putting the bench in those games would have likely led to losses. If we had a few blow-outs, more guys could have stepped on to the court.

I personally feel that the bench should be developed as much as possible, so the main players get some rest and we have more experienced backups in case of injury, but not at the expense of losing games.

For example, it seems like Coach K tried to rest Jabari Parker as much as he could, saving his best talent for a tournament run. I think that's a good idea, IF you can. I'm not sure we had that luxury this year with the close games.

 

[realorange]

Whether you want to buy into it or not, JB explains his thinking on the thread SWC posted on the JB Show.

 

[Forza Azzurri]

I'm not saying he isn't great for our program, and has the program running at an all time high level. Overall we are in very good shape, but that still doesn't hide the fact that when it really matters we have underachieved. I know i'm not the first person to say this. You can have it both ways. No way am i calling for Boeheim to resign or anything ridiculous like that, but other then the past couple of years our post season results have fallen far below what anyone would have expected for such a great program. I really don't think I need to re-hatch all of our March failures do i?

This goes back to the OP and Boeheim's stubbornness. In my post I pointed to the reason I believe we have underachieved in the post season. I don't think that's too harsh?

Ok...so what you are really saying is that Boehim's teams have underachieved in the NCAA tournament.

Let's examine that.

First, let's establish some criteria for underachieving.

SU fans seem to be happy as long as SU makes the elite eight, so let's say that any team that makes the elite eight or better has not underachieved.

Furthermore, let's say that underachieving really means losing in round where your seed dictates that you should win the game.

Since the NCAA began the seeding process in 1980, SU has made the tournament 27 times.

Of those 27 appearances, we have underachieved, based upon the above definition, in 10 of those tournaments.

Conversely, we have overachieved, defined by exceeding the elimination round dictated by the seed, only twice.

We have achieved on par with our seed 9 times and have made four final four and two elite eights.

So, we have underacheived 37% of the time.

Is that good or bad?

I would argue that underachieving almost 40% of the time is not a good outcome.

Therefore, based upon entire body of work in the tournament, I would agree with you that Boeheim's teams have underachieved.

Round 1 to Anomander.

Let's dig below the surface of that underachievement.

Let's examine when the under achivement occurred, the level of underachievement and the circumstances surrounding the underachievement.

Of those 10 years where Boeheim's teams have not performed to expectations, five of them occurred in the 1980-1991 period and five of them have occurred in the 1992-present period.

Of those ten, I would characterize 1986, 1988, 1990, 1991 & 2005 as really bad since SU lost to teams they really had no right losing to.

Of the other five under achieving years:

1980 - we lost to #5 seed as a #1 but that #5 seed went to final four and lost to eventual champ Louisville.

1999 - we were an 8 seed that lost to a 9 - that is a pick'em game

2006 - we lost as a #5 to a #12 but the heeart and soul of that team, and its best player was hobbled by a severe groin injury

2010 - we lost as #1 seed to a #5 seed, while missing one of our key players, that went to the national championship game

2011 - Lost to a #6 seed as a #3 seed to a team that had beaten us during the regular season.

I don't view any of those as terrible losses.

Hence, of our 10 years where we underachieved, I view half of them as really bad losses. Again, not a good outcome.

But four of those five really bad losses occurred over twenty years ago.

In the last ten twenty years, I think this team has had exactly one really inexcusable tourney loss: Vermont in '05 (I was there - thanks for reminding me).

And of the four remaining losses to a lower seed, two of them had a key player hobbled by injury and the third was to a 9 seed as an eight.

This is hardly a record of consistent underachievement.

If you had made this post in 1992, I would have agreed with you wholeheartedly.

Boeheim's teams had a god-awful track record in the 80's and early 90s. They lost early and often to teams that they should never have lost to.

The problem is that it is not 1992, it is 2014 and there is no consistent record of underachievement over the last twenty years.

Those of you who are using a record of under achievement in the tournament against Boeheim today are doing so based on results from 20+ to 30+ years ago.

Not really fair to give those results the same weight that you give more recent results. He is a different coach than he was 20-30 years ago.

Sorry. I no longer buy that argument.

Is he the best? No way.

Who is better in the tourney over the last twenty years?

Duke/Coach K
Carolina
Kansas
Michigan State/Izzo
Florida/Donovan
UConn/Calhoun
Kentucky
Louisville
Pitino
UCLA
Ohio State


Maybe a couple others that have slipped my mind.


350 D1 programs and a handful, or a "haffa handful" as my nonna, who taught me to cook and never used a measuring cup or spoon, used to say.

And if you shrink that time period to the more recent past, that list shrinks even further.

JB and his teams are getting better, not worse.

I think you need to re-evaluate your impression of his tourney performances.

 

[djcon57]

2011 - Lost to a #6 seed as a #3 seed to a team that had beaten us during the regular season.

I agree with the majority of your post, just wanted to point out Marquette was actually an 11 seed, but was BS that we played them in the 2nd round because the Big East had like 10 teams in the tourney that year

 

[anomander]

Ok...so what you are really saying is that Boehim's teams have underachieved in the NCAA tournament.

Let's examine that.

First, let's establish some criteria for underachieving.

SU fans seem to be happy as long as SU makes the elite eight, so let's say that any team that makes the elite eight or better has not underachieved.

Furthermore, let's say that underachieving really means losing in round where your seed dictates that you should win the game.

Since the NCAA began the seeding process in 1980, SU has made the tournament 27 times.

Of those 27 appearances, we have underachieved, based upon the above definition, in 10 of those tournaments.

Conversely, we have overachieved, defined by exceeding the elimination round dictated by the seed, only twice.

We have achieved on par with our seed 9 times and have made four final four and two elite eights.

So, we have underacheived 37% of the time.

Is that good or bad?

I would argue that underachieving almost 40% of the time is not a good outcome.

Therefore, based upon entire body of work in the tournament, I would agree with you that Boeheim's teams have underachieved.

Round 1 to Anomander.

Let's dig below the surface of that underachievement.

Let's examine when the under achivement occurred, the level of underachievement and the circumstances surrounding the underachievement.

Of those 10 years where Boeheim's teams have not performed to expectations, five of them occurred in the 1980-1991 period and five of them have occurred in the 1992-present period.

Of those ten, I would characterize 1986, 1988, 1990, 1991 & 2005 as really bad since SU lost to teams they really had no right losing to.

Of the other five under achieving years:

1980 - we lost to #5 seed as a #1 but that #5 seed went to final four and lost to eventual champ Louisville.

1999 - we were an 8 seed that lost to a 9 - that is a pick'em game

2006 - we lost as a #5 to a #12 but the heeart and soul of that team, and its best player was hobbled by a severe groin injury

2010 - we lost as #1 seed to a #5 seed, while missing one of our key players, that went to the national championship game

2011 - Lost to a #6 seed as a #3 seed to a team that had beaten us during the regular season.

I don't view any of those as terrible losses.

Hence, of our 10 years where we underachieved, I view half of them as really bad losses. Again, not a good outcome.

But four of those five really bad losses occurred over twenty years ago.

In the last ten twenty years, I think this team has had exactly one really inexcusable tourney loss: Vermont in '05 (I was there - thanks for reminding me).

And of the four remaining losses to a lower seed, two of them had a key player hobbled by injury and the third was to a 9 seed as an eight.

This is hardly a record of consistent underachievement.

If you had made this post in 1992, I would have agreed with you wholeheartedly.

Boeheim's teams had a god-awful track record in the 80's and early 90s. They lost early and often to teams that they should never have lost to.

The problem is that it is not 1992, it is 2014 and there is no consistent record of underachievement over the last twenty years.

Those of you who are using a record of under achievement in the tournament against Boeheim today are doing so based on results from 20+ to 30+ years ago.

Not really fair to give those results the same weight that you give more recent results. He is a different coach than he was 20-30 years ago.

Sorry. I no longer buy that argument.

Is he the best? No way.

Who is better in the tourney over the last twenty years?

Duke/Coach K
Carolina
Kansas
Michigan State/Izzo
Florida/Donovan
UConn/Calhoun
Kentucky
Louisville
Pitino
UCLA
Ohio State


Maybe a couple others that have slipped my mind.


350 D1 programs and a handful, or a "haffa handful" as my nonna, who taught me to cook and never used a measuring cup or spoon, used to say.

And if you shrink that time period to the more recent past, that list shrinks even further.

JB and his teams are getting better, not worse.

I think you need to re-evaluate your impression of his tourney performances.

You kind of made my point. I am saying Boeheim's stubbornness to develop a bench has hurt us. In the years you listed 2006 (Gmac), 2010 (Arinze), 2012 (Fab) we were forced to play a back up Freshman who basically had no game experience. I'm not arguing that Riley, or Baye were ready to play, but if they got more minutes in the regular season maybe the learning curve wouldn't have been that steep. The 2010 and 2012 teams were especially elite, and just shows how 1 injury pretty much tanked our season. In 2006 Gmac wasn't able to play and we had no answer. You can also argue that if he wasn't run into the ground all season he could have been healthy. Same with Triche last year, and Grant this year.

 

[DoctorBombay]

It should not be mutually exclusive to disagree with JB on his "thin bench" philosophy(s), or thinking we have "underachieved" over the years, while also recognizing he's a great HC and will go down as one of the best ever.
I have NEVER agreed with his handling of the bench over the years, mostly because I've observed other coaches like JTII, Pitino, and Donovan, have great success utilizing the ENTIRE roster. To me its like watching a great football coach like Bill Parcells and criticizing him, as I always did, for an over-emphasis on defense while neglecting the offense- (looking at you, Scott Brunner)!
It doesn't mean Parcells wasn't a great coach, just that I disagreed with his overall philosophy in relation to the offensive side of the ball.
IMHO, JB has sucked in utilizing his bench over the years. Whether that's a recruiting problem, "system" problem, or "coaches decision" problem, it has bitten us in the ass before, and has the potential to bite us in the ass most years.
Its totally unnecessary, IMHO, that he needs to be "forced"...dragged kicking and screaming into playing players who're sitting on the bench, versus the alternative. JMHO

 

[Briancuse]

You kind of made my point. I am saying Boeheim's stubbornness to develop a bench has hurt us. In the years you listed 2006 (Gmac), 2010 (Arinze), 2012 (Fab) we were forced to play a back up Freshman who basically had no game experience. I'm not arguing that Riley, or Baye were ready to play, but if they got more minutes in the regular season maybe the learning curve wouldn't have been that steep. The 2010 and 2012 teams were especially elite, and just shows how 1 injury pretty much tanked our season. In 2006 Gmac wasn't able to play and we had no answer. You can also argue that if he wasn't run into the ground all season he could have been healthy. Same with Triche last year, and Grant this year.

You can't develop a bench just in case you get a freak injury or your center doesn't do his work.

 

[Forza Azzurri]

You kind of made my point. I am saying Boeheim's stubbornness to develop a bench has hurt us. In the years you listed 2006 (Gmac), 2010 (Arinze), 2012 (Fab) we were forced to play a back up Freshman who basically had no game experience. I'm not arguing that Riley, or Baye were ready to play, but if they got more minutes in the regular season maybe the learning curve wouldn't have been that steep. The 2010 and 2012 teams were especially elite, and just shows how 1 injury pretty much tanked our season. In 2006 Gmac wasn't able to play and we had no answer. You can also argue that if he wasn't run into the ground all season he could have been healthy. Same with Triche last year, and Grant this year.

I made your point?

Dashonte Riley, as a senior, is averaging 4.5 pts a game at a directional Michigan school and you're telling me he could have done enough to replace Onuaku?

Giving Riley 10 mins a game every game that year would have made a difference against Butler????

You go down the roster and tell me who would have replaced GMAC in '06...McCroskey, Josh Wright? Rautins as a frosh?

And do the same for 2012 with Fab...Keita and Xmas both played over 400 minutes that year. You're telling me that, if it had been 800, they would have done a better job on Sullivan?

In all three cases, it had nothing to do with a learning curve. It was all about talent and ability. There was nobody on those three rosters who could even begin to replace what those guys brought to the table.

Depth, or lack thereof, had zero to do with the outcomes that year.

C'mon...you can't really believe what you are writing, do you?

 

[anomander]

I made your point?

Dashonte Riley, as a senior, is averaging 4.5 pts a game at a directional Michigan school and you're telling me he could have done enough to replace Onuaku?

Giving Riley 10 mins a game every game that year would have made a difference against Butler????

You go down the roster and tell me who would have replaced GMAC in '06...McCroskey, Josh Wright? Rautins as a frosh?

And do the same for 2012 with Fab...Keita and Xmas both played over 400 minutes that year. You're telling me that, if it had been 800, they would have done a better job on Sullivan?

In all three cases, it had nothing to do with a learning curve. It was all about talent and ability. There was nobody on those three rosters who could even begin to replace what those guys brought to the table.

Depth, or lack thereof, had zero to do with the outcomes that year.

C'mon...you can't really believe what you are writing, do you?

These guys are your primary back ups. I guess we expected them to play 40 minutes a game? Statistically Baye's best year was his Freshman season. Boeheim himself has said that BMK is the best defensive center he has ever had ...
Trevor Hass ‏@TrevorHass 38m
Boeheim: "Baye has been as good of a player as we've ever had in the middle of the zone."

But of course he wasn't good enough to play as a Freshman. All Boeheim expects from our centers, especially our back up centers is they are solid on defense. It's not like we were asking Riley and Baye to go out and give you 10 and 10. Some minutes during the season in a regular role wouldn't have led to such a deer in headlights kind of performances.
As for McNamara maybe if he wasn't run into the ground the whole year he wouldn't have got injured. Ask any sports trainer and they will tell you excessive wear and tear throughout the season breaks down your body making you more susceptible to injury. Gmac's -groin, Triche - back, Grant - back, definitely points to overuse.

It should not be mutually exclusive to disagree with JB on his "thin bench" philosophy(s), or thinking we have "underachieved" over the years, while also recognizing he's a great HC and will go down as one of the best ever.
I have NEVER agreed with his handling of the bench over the years, mostly because I've observed other coaches like JTII, Pitino, and Donovan, have great success utilizing the ENTIRE roster. To me its like watching a great football coach like Bill Parcells and criticizing him, as I always did, for an over-emphasis on defense while neglecting the offense- (looking at you, Scott Brunner)!
It doesn't mean Parcells wasn't a great coach, just that I disagreed with his overall philosophy in relation to the offensive side of the ball.
IMHO, JB has sucked in utilizing his bench over the years. Whether that's a recruiting problem, "system" problem, or "coaches decision" problem, it has bitten us in the ass before, and has the potential to bite us in the ass most years.
Its totally unnecessary, IMHO, that he needs to be "forced"...dragged kicking and screaming into playing players who're sitting on the bench, versus the alternative. JMHO

I feel the exact same way. Just because I strongly disagree with with one aspect of JB's coaching philosophy doesn't mean I don't think he is a HOF coach, and the best thing we have going for the program.

 

[rstone7727]

Not seeing the relation to injuries and playing a lot of minutes. We can all agree that Pitino uses more of his bench than we do, but he may have had even more injuries than us.

From Yahoo Sports Article by Pat Forde.

"Further down the list, below Ware, are some other basketball injuries that cost Pitino plenty. His Kentucky team would have won the national title in 1997 if star guard Derek Anderson hadn't blown out a knee in late January – even without him, the Wildcats advanced to the title game before losing in overtime to Arizona. A broken foot by Preston Knowles late in Louisville's 2011 first-round NCAA game against Morehead State turned a slight lead into a huge upset loss. Five season-ending knee injuries to three players – Ellis Myles, Rakeem Buckles and Mike Marra – compromised other recent Louisville seasons".

 

[tbonezone]

jimmy is shooting 1 for 37 at syracuse. that's two score minus three.

 

[br801]

In 2006 Gmac wasn't able to play and we had no answer. You can also argue that if he wasn't run into the ground all season he could have been healthy. Same with Triche last year, and Grant this year.

Triche wasn't run into the ground last season; a far better player than Cooney at the time, he absolutely belonged on the floor and was a tough kid who battled though nagging injuries and always played hard in all aspects of the game, even when his shot was not falling.

And Grant wasn't run into the ground this season; he plays with reckless abandon, often above the rim, and that probably leaves him more susceptible to injury than a lot of other players. He didn't get hurt because he was overworked.

 

[SBU72]

So you want a team that has a margin of victory of only 6 or 7 and is 2nd in the ACC with a 13-4 record to play lesser ready freshman so they would be a little more ready now. Do you really think that SU would be 13-4 NOW if they had done that? Would you prefer a 10-7 record and about 7th in the ACC and maybe a 5th seed in the tourney to develop players you may or may not need?

 

[Forza Azzurri]

I agree with the majority of your post, just wanted to point out Marquette was actually an 11 seed, but was BS that we played them in the 2nd round because the Big East had like 10 teams in the tourney that year

Yes, my bad. Good catch. Thanks.

 

[anomander]

So you want a team that has a margin of victory of only 6 or 7 and is 2nd in the ACC with a 13-4 record to play lesser ready freshman so they would be a little more ready now. Do you really think that SU would be 13-4 NOW if they had done that? Would you prefer a 10-7 record and about 7th in the ACC and maybe a 5th seed in the tourney to develop players you may or may not need?

It's amazing that only our Freshman aren't ready to play. Despite all the top 10 recruiting classes, only are Freshman aren't ready.

How do we explain that do the other schools just evaluate HS kids who are ready to contribute right away better then us?

 

[AZOrange]

It's amazing that only our Freshman aren't ready to play. Despite all the top 10 recruiting classes, only are Freshman aren't ready. How do we explain that do the other schools just evaluate HS kids who are ready to contribute right away better then us?

there are tons of Freshman not ready to play even though they do. That's why so many teams have so many losses