General20
Basketball Maven
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 1,711
- Like
- 11,518
Before I get to the Louisville game, I want to take a quick look back to rivalry week. I understand that rivalry week is no more than an ESPN promotion, and normally I dont take it any more or less seriously than any other week. But this year was interesting because of the four rivalries that mean something to me personally (Syracuse-Georgetown, Syracuse-UConn, Liverpool-Manchester United, Yankees-Red Sox) three were played last week with Syracuse taking care of business twice, and Liverpool letting me down.
What I found interesting was the way Syracuse took care of business. Both their rivals (Georgetown and UConn) really came to play and gave SU their best shots yet they did it in opposite ways. Georgetown, in my opinion, played the best defense anybody has played against SU all year (although Louisville may have stolen that title), and UConn played the best offensively anybody has played against SU this year. Yet, Syracuse found a way to get it done in both games. They seem to know when they have to put their energy into the defensive side of the ball and when they have to get it done on the offensive side of the ball. I give Syracuse a lot of credit for winning those games the way they did, especially when you throw Louisville into that mix.
When I look at a schedule, I never try to predict the outcome of each individual game. I'm not so good at predicting individual results that I can get every game right, or almost every game right, and predict overall records with accuracy. I am, however, pretty good at looking at stretches of games within a schedule and predicting how many wins or losses will come out of that stretch of games. Going into this season I predicted Syracuse would have somewhere between 3-6 losses, depending on injuries and how many lucky bounces they got/didn't get. I saw the stretch of ND, Cinci, WV, as one where SU would pick up at least one loss, and obviously the stretch of G'town, UConn, and Louisville as a stretch where having only one loss would be considered an accomplishment.
There are some games where the quality of play matters more than the result. Early in the season we pretty much know SU is racking up W's, so what matters is how the team looks and how they are building towards those tougher late season games. Then there are those games where only the result matters. NCAA and Big East tournament games obviously fall into this category (SU played like crap against Manhattan, Oklahoma St, and Auburn in the 2003 tournament. It didn't matter though, not so long as they came away with the wins).
I believe this Louisville game falls into the latter category. Because they have been so hot, because Syracuse has struggled against them in the past, because it is a road game against a top 20 team, because we just played a rivalry game one day before, and another rivalry game three days before that - I was not willing to make any sweeping statements about the quality of the Syracuse team from this game, no matter what the outcome was. All I really wanted was a win.
I can describe this game with a comment a friend of mine once said to me about Josh Pace. "If you are a Division 1 basketball player and you cant shoot, you better be able to do everything else well." Keep in mind that this was meant as a compliment towards Pace, he was explaining why he liked Pace's game.
I always liked that comment because its true, and it applies perfectly to the Louisville game. Syracuse shot almost as bad as its possible to shoot. 1-29 from outside the paint, and only 2 jump shots made all game. Everything else was a lay up, dunk, or free throw. It boggles the mind to think about. Yet they won, against a good team in a tough environment. The reason they won, is because they did everything else well. They took care of the ball, they passed well, they played almost perfect defense, and they hit the boards.
Will that type of performance get them a title come tournament time? Nope. It most certainly will not. But then again, the game SU played against Manhattan in 2003 was not title worthy either, and we all know how that season ended. Sometimes getting the W is all that matters.
I also want to mention coaching because there was some incredible coaching going on. Basketball is really a simple game. Whoever is able to put the ball in the hoop more, wins. Yet, Syracuse has shot the ball almost embarrassingly bad for close to two months now (not counting the UConn game) and they only lost one game. Think about that for a second. We are playing a game where the team who is best at getting the ball through a hoop is suppose to win, and we have struggled mightily getting the ball to go through the hoop. Yet we keep winning. That tells me that Boeheim has come up with a near perfect system. He has a scheme that continues to generate wins despite poor performances from the players. Yes, he needs the right athletes to pull it off, and of course its not a perfect system, but Syracuse just shot 6% from three and beat a top 20 team on the road. While the shooting numbers against Louisville are extreme examples, we have also beaten teams like Georgetown, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Villanova, Pitt, and others while shooting like crap.
I honestly dont know that I have seen a more successful system than the one Syracuse is playing right now. Boeheim pretty much has the whole coaching thing figured out, and I am in awe of it.
On the other side of the court is Piteno, who has an impressive system of his own. He has one of the best shot blockers in the country stationed in the middle of his zone, so he extends pressure out, and dares the offense to drive past his guys, into their shot blocker. It does not generate as many turnovers as Syracuse's zone does, but its very effective.
Louisville's D is vulnerable to a shooter who is good at coming off a screen. Nichols or Rautins could have thrown their entire scheme off. Unfortunately Syracuse doesn't have anybody who can do that, this year, and they couldn't hit any mid range jump shots. That pretty much left them with forcing the ball inside against one of the best shot blockers in the nation. An alternative that is bound to leave you with a low shooting percentage.
One last thought, as good a coach as Piteno is, he has a tendency to over-coach. Louisville likes to play a lot of players and switch up how they play. Which is well and good great in theory, but in practice it can lead to players who dont totally "get it." It can also lead to bad decisions. I think both of those things cost Louisville tonight. Their zone completely shut us down, they should have stayed in it the entire game. If they had they would have won. But Piteno likes to switch things up, so he pressed a little bit. I dont remember Syracuse ever turning the ball over against their press, but I do remember Syracuse getting 6 or 8 easy points off Louisville's press - which might not seem like much but was more than the difference in the game.
What I found interesting was the way Syracuse took care of business. Both their rivals (Georgetown and UConn) really came to play and gave SU their best shots yet they did it in opposite ways. Georgetown, in my opinion, played the best defense anybody has played against SU all year (although Louisville may have stolen that title), and UConn played the best offensively anybody has played against SU this year. Yet, Syracuse found a way to get it done in both games. They seem to know when they have to put their energy into the defensive side of the ball and when they have to get it done on the offensive side of the ball. I give Syracuse a lot of credit for winning those games the way they did, especially when you throw Louisville into that mix.
When I look at a schedule, I never try to predict the outcome of each individual game. I'm not so good at predicting individual results that I can get every game right, or almost every game right, and predict overall records with accuracy. I am, however, pretty good at looking at stretches of games within a schedule and predicting how many wins or losses will come out of that stretch of games. Going into this season I predicted Syracuse would have somewhere between 3-6 losses, depending on injuries and how many lucky bounces they got/didn't get. I saw the stretch of ND, Cinci, WV, as one where SU would pick up at least one loss, and obviously the stretch of G'town, UConn, and Louisville as a stretch where having only one loss would be considered an accomplishment.
There are some games where the quality of play matters more than the result. Early in the season we pretty much know SU is racking up W's, so what matters is how the team looks and how they are building towards those tougher late season games. Then there are those games where only the result matters. NCAA and Big East tournament games obviously fall into this category (SU played like crap against Manhattan, Oklahoma St, and Auburn in the 2003 tournament. It didn't matter though, not so long as they came away with the wins).
I believe this Louisville game falls into the latter category. Because they have been so hot, because Syracuse has struggled against them in the past, because it is a road game against a top 20 team, because we just played a rivalry game one day before, and another rivalry game three days before that - I was not willing to make any sweeping statements about the quality of the Syracuse team from this game, no matter what the outcome was. All I really wanted was a win.
I can describe this game with a comment a friend of mine once said to me about Josh Pace. "If you are a Division 1 basketball player and you cant shoot, you better be able to do everything else well." Keep in mind that this was meant as a compliment towards Pace, he was explaining why he liked Pace's game.
I always liked that comment because its true, and it applies perfectly to the Louisville game. Syracuse shot almost as bad as its possible to shoot. 1-29 from outside the paint, and only 2 jump shots made all game. Everything else was a lay up, dunk, or free throw. It boggles the mind to think about. Yet they won, against a good team in a tough environment. The reason they won, is because they did everything else well. They took care of the ball, they passed well, they played almost perfect defense, and they hit the boards.
Will that type of performance get them a title come tournament time? Nope. It most certainly will not. But then again, the game SU played against Manhattan in 2003 was not title worthy either, and we all know how that season ended. Sometimes getting the W is all that matters.
I also want to mention coaching because there was some incredible coaching going on. Basketball is really a simple game. Whoever is able to put the ball in the hoop more, wins. Yet, Syracuse has shot the ball almost embarrassingly bad for close to two months now (not counting the UConn game) and they only lost one game. Think about that for a second. We are playing a game where the team who is best at getting the ball through a hoop is suppose to win, and we have struggled mightily getting the ball to go through the hoop. Yet we keep winning. That tells me that Boeheim has come up with a near perfect system. He has a scheme that continues to generate wins despite poor performances from the players. Yes, he needs the right athletes to pull it off, and of course its not a perfect system, but Syracuse just shot 6% from three and beat a top 20 team on the road. While the shooting numbers against Louisville are extreme examples, we have also beaten teams like Georgetown, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Villanova, Pitt, and others while shooting like crap.
I honestly dont know that I have seen a more successful system than the one Syracuse is playing right now. Boeheim pretty much has the whole coaching thing figured out, and I am in awe of it.
On the other side of the court is Piteno, who has an impressive system of his own. He has one of the best shot blockers in the country stationed in the middle of his zone, so he extends pressure out, and dares the offense to drive past his guys, into their shot blocker. It does not generate as many turnovers as Syracuse's zone does, but its very effective.
Louisville's D is vulnerable to a shooter who is good at coming off a screen. Nichols or Rautins could have thrown their entire scheme off. Unfortunately Syracuse doesn't have anybody who can do that, this year, and they couldn't hit any mid range jump shots. That pretty much left them with forcing the ball inside against one of the best shot blockers in the nation. An alternative that is bound to leave you with a low shooting percentage.
One last thought, as good a coach as Piteno is, he has a tendency to over-coach. Louisville likes to play a lot of players and switch up how they play. Which is well and good great in theory, but in practice it can lead to players who dont totally "get it." It can also lead to bad decisions. I think both of those things cost Louisville tonight. Their zone completely shut us down, they should have stayed in it the entire game. If they had they would have won. But Piteno likes to switch things up, so he pressed a little bit. I dont remember Syracuse ever turning the ball over against their press, but I do remember Syracuse getting 6 or 8 easy points off Louisville's press - which might not seem like much but was more than the difference in the game.
