Jon Rothstein live from Cuse practice today | Page 3 | Syracusefan.com

Jon Rothstein live from Cuse practice today

dollarbill44 said:
I've been saying this since last February, he is Larry Bird (and no, not because he is white): same height, same frame, same speed, same skill-set, similar shooting style...right down to the cheesy mustache. If he can develop his dribble a little bit more, he will be right there.
Expand...
So you are saying he is the white Larry Bird?
 
dollarbill44 said:
I've been saying this since last February, he is Larry Bird (and no, not because he is white): same height, same frame, same speed, same skill-set, similar shooting style...right down to the cheesy mustache. If he can develop his dribble a little bit more, he will be right there.
Expand...

I can't wait to see Tyler Lydon this year, but he is not Larry Bird yet. Bird single handedly drove Indiana St. to the NCAA Finals in '79 and was elite in every aspect of the game. His shooting & rebounding were elite. His passing skills were amazing. He was tough as nails, constantly double teamed, played inside-out, and was possibly the best trash talker of his generation. And he was the anchor to the Celtics dynasty (along with the Lakers & Pistons) that brought the NBA back to prominence.

If Tyler leads us to the Finals we can compare him to anyone you like though... :)
 
dollarbill44 said:
Lol. Neither of their games incorporate a lot of jumping.
Expand...

56951773.jpg
 
dollarbill44 said:
I've been saying this since last February, he is Larry Bird (and no, not because he is white): same height, same frame, same speed, same skill-set, similar shooting style...right down to the cheesy mustache. If he can develop his dribble a little bit more, he will be right there.
Expand...

Rico is not cheesy, you Blasphemer!!!
 
RF2044 said:
Cuseman4, I don't mean to aim this at you, because you have been bringing outstanding info to the board, but your post is a convenient way for me to highlight this point.

The reports on here about what's been happening in practice are extremely exaggerated. It has turned into a huge example of the telephone game--it started out this summer as, "Wow, Howard is really impressive in summer workouts--he's gotten a lot better," to "I saw him outplay Gillon in an unstructured pickup game," and has now morphed into "he's eating Gillon up so far."

The escalation of how much Howard is destroying Gillon has been funny to read these past few weeks. It is almost like the observation gets more embellished each time it's passed along. Francis [who I love] makes one offhanded comment about it in his podcast, and then it gets picked up by the board as "fact."

For reasons that I will outline in my annual fall practice summary in the next week or so, let me reassure everybody that such reports have been greatly exaggerated. Howard might still end up starting at PG, but it will have nothing to do with him "eating up Gillon" or Gillon not being sufficiently capable.
Expand...
All for your opinion, fire away at me if you mean it or not lol, but I have seen Howard and Gillion go at it myself and the few times I have seen them go at it, Howard was definitely outplaying Gillion.
 
iommi said:
I agree that Battle is an elite slasher and defender but the notion that Battle isn't a good shooter is just plain wrong. It's not his strength but it's not a negative.
Expand...

I've said the same thing. Not to mention with all the weapons we have when Battle takes 3's they will be good open looks that he will make a good percentage of.
 
Am I the only one who hates how every thread like this devolves into an argument about who the starting five is going to be? Am I the only one who really doesn't care what the starting line up is? Its pretty clear that we are going to play many different line ups this year, and we are going to play different line ups in different games to exploit our opponents weaknesses. Who cares what line up we play during the first couple minutes of the game, which by the way are the least important minutes when both teams are still feeling each other out.

Anyway, as an attempt to change the direction of the conversation, I'm going to throw out a few line ups which I think are interesting or useful. Here are the rules I am going by: first, to me SU has only 3 positions, not 5, and those three positions are (1) top of the zone (2) wing of the zone (3) center. I'm going to play everybody at their regular position and nobody is going to switch positions except Lydon and White who I think are capable. Second, I'm going to have Lydon and Battle in every line up. Why? I think those are our two best players (maybe more hope than think in Battle's case, but its more of an educated guess than a wild hope because I saw him play quite a few times in high school).

Best defensive line up:

Howard, Battle, Lydon, Roberson, Chukwu - Pretty self explanatory here, tons of length, tons of shot blocking, tons of rebounding. I could see White possibly emerging as a better defensive option at the top of the zone, its a little too early to tell just yet.

Best offensive line up:

Gillon, Battle, White, Roberson, Lydon - I'm imagining 4 great shooters with Roberson down low to vacuum up every miss. Also with this kind of court spacing Battle will dominate just about anybody who tries to guard him 1 on 1 without help. For me, one of the most interesting questions is if we see Lydon at the 5 this year, and if so, how much. I think Boeheim will decide to play Lydon at the 5 when he sees an advantage - like when the other team's 5 is resting or in foul trouble, or when team's are not going down low against us.

When we press (or get pressed):

Gillon, Battle, White, Lydon, Chukwu - If we really want to sell out on the press Howard can replace Lydon. This could be one of our best pressing teams ever. I think we use this option in most competitive games.

Best offense/defense balance line up:

Howard, Battle, White, Lydon, Chukwu - I think there are plenty of minutes for both Roberson and Chukwu but we lack a little balance with both on the floor at the same time. I wonder if they become an either/or situation in many games even though they don't play the same position. I could have also said Howard, Battle, White, Roberson, Lydon. I could also replace Howard with Gillon in either of these line ups. Lots still to be worked out.

Most intriguing line up:

Battle, White, Lydon, Roberson, Chukwu - Lots of defense in this line up, plus three good shooters, and five rebounders. The flaw is that this line up is dependent on a freshman to do almost 100% of the ball handling, and distributing, and a disproportionate amount of the scoring. If Battle is a Carmelo Anthony type (not in style or even really in quality, but in the fact that he can be THE man on a championship caliber team as a freshman) then its possible we see this line up a lot and it becomes a very successful line up.

Players you don't see in any of these line ups: Coleman, Thompson, Moyer. You'll see Coleman in every game, and you'll see Thompson in every blow out, but I don't think any of these three will be on the court when it really really matters barring Coleman playing because Chukwu is in foul trouble.

If we win the championship these two things will happen:

1) Battle is a one-and-done top 10 draft pick.
2) Chukwu is the ACC defensive player of the year.
 
jordoo said:
I've said the same thing. Not to mention with all the weapons we have when Battle takes 3's they will be good open looks that he will make a good percentage of.
Expand...

Yeah, and Battle is a very smart player. I'd be shocked if JB has to admonish him for taking bad shots. He will get good looks but if he doesn't have one, he won't force the issue. His dad taught him well since he was in grammar school.
 
iommi said:
Yeah, it's not that we want Lydon off the bench. Battle is a 2, White is a 3. Both of them start, therefore unless you want to shoehorn start one or both of them out of position, those are their starting roles. As Brook03 said, Roberson will start, considering his tenure as a starter, therefore Lydon would have to come off the bench. Lydon could start, absolutely. He could start at the 3 or the 4. If he starts at the 4, that's the easiest, in that no one is out of position. I just think he wouldn't be bothered by a bench role, as he will still get the most minutes and he's used to coming in off the bench. The who starts debate doesn't matter, it's all about the minutes. Maybe JB thinks like cusefan0307 and figures he has to start Lydon but all of this is just a fun debate and not paramount to the team's success.
Expand...

I'm curious as to what you've seen that makes you think Battle is a "2"?

From what l've SEEN so far this summer/fall, he's more of a 1/3 combo than a "2". Great athlete who will shine in transition, his strength is attacking the paint and mid range floaters. His shot needs work.
 
General20 Great post. The starting lineup debates drive me nuts too and though I participate, I always say the starting lineup doesn't matter one bit.

Two disagreements: 1) Your "intriguing" lineup might be tantalizing but Battle is our third best point guard, so I'm not very intrigued by that and don't think it will be utilized often.

2)It would be amazing if Chukwu is that dominant defensively but ACC Defensive Player of the Year is highly unlikely. I doubt he gets the kind of minutes to get that kind of accolade. And I still think we can cut down the nets without Chukwu reaching those heights defensively.
 
iommi said:
General20 Great post. The starting lineup debates drive me nuts too and though I participate, I always say the starting lineup doesn't matter one bit.

Two disagreements: 1) Your "intriguing" lineup might be tantalizing but Battle is our third best point guard, so I'm not very intrigued by that and don't think it will be utilized often.

2)It would be amazing if Chukwu is that dominant defensively but ACC Defensive Player of the Year is highly unlikely. I doubt he gets the kind of minutes to get that kind of accolade. And I still think we can cut down the nets without Chukwu reaching those heights defensively.
Expand...

What if I said "best defensive player in the ACC" instead of the actual ACC defensive player of the year award winner. I don't care who actually wins the award, but I do think we need Cukwu to be a dominant shot blocker to be the best team in the country.
 
iommi said:
Yeah, and Battle is a very smart player. I'd be shocked if JB has to admonish him for taking bad shots. He will get good looks but if he doesn't have one, he won't force the issue. His dad taught him well since he was in grammar school.
Expand...

Smart players I like!

But he's a freshman, Boeheim's probably going to admonish him because Kris Joseph missed another defensive rotation. That's just how it goes...
 
Jake said:
I'm curious as to what you've seen that makes you think Battle is a "2"?

From what l've SEEN so far this summer/fall, he's more of a 1/3 combo than a "2". Great athlete who will shine in transition, his strength is attacking the paint and mid range floaters. His shot needs work.
Expand...

I've seen him in person more than a handful of times. Granted, it was mostly his sophomore and senior year, since his junior year was a washout with injuries.

He could play the 3 but here's why he's a 2. Your description is spot on, starting with, "great athlete." The 2 accentuates his strengths better than any other position. He's a wing, and in the SU system, being up top in the zone brings out his defense and ability to turn it into offense. He's an excellent on-ball defender. He's 6'6 1/2", that size is ideal for the top of the zone, where he can harass smaller players. Throw him down low and that advantage is negated.

Battle is a decent passer but not elite, that's why I don't see him as a 1. He's unselfish but much better off being set up to score than setting up others. I'm surprised you said, "floaters" because when I've seen him he had a mid range game but not a floater in the way I think of floaters (I think of Josh Pace's floater). His jumper is mostly a face up traditional jumper, unless he's added a floater to his repertoire. His handle is good not point guard great. As you said, he shines in transition, where his strength and athleticism makes him a cut above. I'd prefer to have him as a guard for that reason as well. Let him be a one man fast break with his defense and ability to finish. Battle is more than capable of helping us getting ball up against pressure and initiating our offense when need be.

The only reason he might not be an ideal 2 is everybody's favorite knock on him: deep ball shooting. The Battle I've seen was a streaky shooter. That still might be the case. I still think he can shoot for a serviceable % from 3-- let's say 30-33% this year. He won't be a liability by any stretch and with the talent around him, he will take good shots. The kid is very smart, with a tremendous hoops IQ. He plays like a son of a coach/ instructor because that's what he is.

In closing, I want the ball in hands. It'd be in his hands more in the 2 than in the 3. And as I've said, we have two better pure lead guards on the roster, so why force the issue?
 
CuseMan4 said:
All for your opinion, fire away at me if you mean it or not lol, but I have seen Howard and Gillion go at it myself and the few times I have seen them go at it, Howard was definitely outplaying Gillion.
Expand...

I'd hesitate to draw any conclusions from pick up ball. I'll leave it at that.

Also curious that we've just had two articles from the two beat writers who cover the team [about the PG situation / whether we would run more], and not once was it mentioned how one PG was ostensibly eating the other one for lunch...
 
RF2044 said:
I'd hesitate to draw any conclusions from pick up ball. I'll leave it at that.

Also curious that we've just had two articles from the two beat writers who cover the team [about the PG situation / whether we would run more], and not once was it mentioned how one PG was ostensibly eating the other one for lunch...
Expand...

To be fair, I love Donna and Mike--great reporters both. However, they are reporters and are not very opinionated, so I'd be shocked if they ever said one player was dominating another in practice.

I also think that we have to give Gillon a chance to get used to SU's system before we draw any conclusions, and as you said, pick up ball doesn't mean much.

Gillon is so different from Howard. Speed and quickness vs. vision and court savvy. They should compliment each other well and as we've said repeatedly give JB so much flexibility to adjust to our opponents.
 
Last edited:
iommi said:
I've seen him in person more than a handful of times. Granted, it was mostly his sophomore and senior year, since his junior year was a washout with injuries.

He could play the 3 but here's why he's a 2. Your description is spot on, starting with, "great athlete." The 2 accentuates his strengths better than any other position. He's a wing, and in the SU system, being up top in the zone brings out his defense and ability to turn it into offense. He's an excellent on-ball defender. He's 6'6 1/2", that size is ideal for the top of the zone, where he can harass smaller players. Throw him down low and that advantage is negated.

Battle is a decent passer but not elite, that's why I don't see him as a 1. He's unselfish but much better off being set up to score than setting up others. I'm surprised you said, "floaters" because when I've seen him he had a mid range game but not a floater in the way I think of floaters (I think of Josh Pace's floater). His jumper is mostly a face up traditional jumper, unless he's added a floater to his repertoire. His handle is good not point guard great. As you said, he shines in transition, where his strength and athleticism makes him a cut above. I'd prefer to have him as a guard for that reason as well. Let him be a one man fast break with his defense and ability to finish. Battle is more than capable of helping us getting ball up against pressure and initiating our offense when need be.

The only reason he might not be an ideal 2 is everybody's favorite knock on him: deep ball shooting. The Battle I've seen was a streaky shooter. That still might be the case. I still think he can shoot for a serviceable % from 3-- let's say 30-33% this year. He won't be a liability by any stretch and with the talent around him, he will take good shots. The kid is very smart, with a tremendous hoops IQ. He plays like a son of a coach/ instructor because that's what he is.

In closing, I want the ball in hands. It'd be in his hands more in the 2 than in the 3. And as I've said, we have two better pure lead guards on the roster, so why force the issue?
Expand...


I respect your opinion a lot and I know you(and some of the other Jersey contingent) have followed Battle for years since HS, but I would rather have him attack the basket/shoot from mid range at this point than fire up threes. That's what White and Lydon are here for.

It's kind of like when we had MCW with Southerland. Why have one guy shoot threes just cause he's a guard if our forwards are better at it?

Anyway, it really doesn't matter as long as we are successful. This thread altogether is very exciting.
 
Cusefan0307 said:
I respect your opinion a lot and I know you(and some of the other Jersey contingent) have followed Battle for years since HS, but I would rather have him attack the basket/shoot from mid range at this point than fire up threes. That's what White and Lydon are here for.

It's kind of like when we had MCW with Southerland. Why have one guy shoot threes just cause he's a guard if our forwards are better at it?

Anyway, it really doesn't matter as long as we are successful. This thread altogether is very exciting.
Expand...

There's nothing here I disagree with, that's why I said he will take only good shots (especially from deep). His strengths are clearly finishing in the lane and mid range. I think he will be a better shooter from 3 than most do, especially with solid shot selection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

sutomcat
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Wednesday for Basketball
Replies
6
Views
790
Ozone!
Ozone!
sutomcat
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Thursday for Basketball
Replies
6
Views
1K
Ozone!
Ozone!

Forum statistics

Threads
168,136
Messages
4,752,037
Members
5,942
Latest member
whodatnatn

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
121
Guests online
1,426
Total visitors
1,547
Totals may include hidden visitors.


Top Bottom