Mike Hopkins talks about succeeding Jim Boeheim, his love for Syracuse, and much more.

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[CusefanATL]

I have no idea if I'm right or wrong. But my intuition is usually never wrong 99% of the time.

Hop is going to keep this freight train moving in the right direction.

And I love how sincere he comes across in talking about "Syracuse" and "basketball" and "Syracuse Basketball"

 

[kuethstheman]

I have no idea if I'm right or wrong. But my intuition is usually never wrong 99% of the time.

 

[Brooky03]

I have no idea if I'm right or wrong. But my intuition is usually never wrong 99% of the time.

Hop is going to keep this freight train moving in the right direction.

And I love how sincere he comes across in talking about "Syracuse" and "basketball" and "Syracuse Basketball"

60% of the time, it works every time

 

[HoustonCuse]

Hopkins good.

 

[texascpa]

The big question not asked:

"Will you stay strictly with the 2-3 zone?"

 

[Brooky03]

The big question not asked:

"Will you stay strictly with the 2-3 zone?"

Not if he wants to win basketball games or a National Championship. We all know you can't win games playing 2-3 zone.

 

[Madbiker]

Nice interview...great answers by Hop. Love the upbeat tone he brings (without any whining, complaining, put downs, etc.). Refreshing.

 

[bballbeadle]

I have no idea if I'm right or wrong. But my intuition is usually never wrong 99% of the time.

Hop is going to keep this freight train moving in the right direction.

And I love how sincere he comes across in talking about "Syracuse" and "basketball" and "Syracuse Basketball"

I gave you a like even though your humor was a tad snide. Just a tad! You know I love you, Cusefan! Yes, it was a "puff piece," but it's still a good thing to read on a dull-ish summer evening.

 

[Rocco]

Although it will be greatly saddening when JB retires, knowing that Hop will be taking over is like a reincarnation of the program. We're in good hands for a long, long time.

 

[sinceseven]

You cant win Championships with " the zone", I am sorry did you sleep through the entire 2003 run, our zone embarrassed the field that year, we are " The Zone" it is feared by all and it should be. If I am not mistaken I think our National team, Team USA, won some games because of "The Zone" and Jimmy b so,... Hop better stay strictly zone, that's who we are.

 

[jordoo]

You cant win Championships with " the zone", I am sorry did you sleep through the entire 2003 run, our zone embarrassed the field that year, we are " The Zone" it is feared by all and it should be. If I am not mistaken I think our National team, Team USA, won some games because of "The Zone" and Jimmy b so,... Hop better stay strictly zone, that's who we are.

I'm fine with Hop changing things up and doing it his own way. I expect that will include our 2-3 but not be limited to only that defense or that defense exactly the way JB had the guys playing it.
I do agree that you can win it all with JB's 2-3 zone. That said in the 03 FF Texas didn't have much problem with it but we outscored them on the back of Melo's best offensive game in orange. In the NC, KU started slow but made a late 1st half run and was much more effective in the 2nd half. We had a huge 1st half on offense and then just sort of hung in there down the stretch.

Edit: Conversely in our 2013 FF we lost because our offense couldn't get the job done. Our defense was great during that run and even after an early barrage from Mich we held them to 61 points on sub 40% shooting.

 

[orangefan13]

4-1 zone with 7'3 guys in the middle year after year.

 

[CusefanATL]

I gave you a like even though your humor was a tad snide. Just a tad! You know I love you, Cusefan! Yes, it was a "puff piece," but it's still a good thing to read on a dull-ish summer evening.

Ha... i really didnt mean it as snide (other than the 1st paragraph). I really am excited about Hop taking over in a sad kind of way b/c that means JB is stepping down.

And I was def being sincere about how sincere Hop is everytime he talks about the game of basketball, the city of syracuse, and the syracuse program as a whole.

 

[jordoo]

4-1 zone with 7'3 guys in the middle year after year.

That would be nice as long as we could continually keep a 7-3 guy on deck learning the zone.

 

[FrancoPizza]

You cant win Championships with " the zone", I am sorry did you sleep through the entire 2003 run, our zone embarrassed the field that year, we are " The Zone" it is feared by all and it should be. If I am not mistaken I think our National team, Team USA, won some games because of "The Zone" and Jimmy b so,... Hop better stay strictly zone, that's who we are.

2003 success factors:
Melo 75%
Balanced scoring 10%
Clutch performers 10%
Zone 5%

Off-hand I can think of only one game that year where the zone truly confused the opponent from start-to-finish: Oklahoma.

Oklahoma St diced it until we switched to pressing and m2m. Auburn shredded it in the 2nd half and we barely hung on. Texas shredded it wire-to-wire. Kansas figured it out in the second half and we scored just enough to hang on. If you rewind to the regular season, we lose those Pitt and ND classics at home if we stayed in the zone down the stretch. JB had a sliding scale where he would switch to m2m if we fell behind by 12 or more in the 2nd half. If anything, those results show just how remarkably steady the offense was that entire year.

Looking to the Hopkins era, the defense that we play is secondary to scoring points and resurrecting the transition game. But make no mistake, strictly zone will die with JB's departure. Hop may have to extend practice time though to teach more than one defense, if you believe Jimmy.

 

[CusefanATL]

2003 success factors:
Melo 75%
Balanced scoring 10%
Clutch performers 10%
Zone 5%

Off-hand I can think of only one game that year where the zone truly confused the opponent from start-to-finish: Oklahoma.

Oklahoma St diced it until we switched to pressing and m2m. Auburn shredded it in the 2nd half and we barely hung on. Texas shredded it wire-to-wire. Kansas figured it out in the second half and we scored just enough to hang on. If you rewind to the regular season, we lose those Pitt and ND classics at home if we stayed in the zone down the stretch. JB had a sliding scale where he would switch to m2m if we fell behind by 12 or more in the 2nd half. If anything, those results show just how remarkably steady the offense was that entire year.

Looking to the Hopkins era, the defense that we play is secondary to scoring points and resurrecting the transition game. But make no mistake, strictly zone will die with JB's departure. Hop may have to extend practice time though to teach more than one defense, if you believe Jimmy.

Georgia Tech?

 

[FrancoPizza]

Georgia Tech?

Eh, I think we almost scored 100 on them in the first half. Again, offense was our bread and butter.

 

[RF2044]

Oklahoma St diced it until we switched to pressing and m2m. Auburn shredded it in the 2nd half and we barely hung on. Texas shredded it wire-to-wire. Kansas figured it out in the second half and we scored just enough to hang on. If you rewind to the regular season, we lose those Pitt and ND classics at home if we stayed in the zone down the stretch. JB had a sliding scale where he would switch to m2m if we fell behind by 12 or more in the 2nd half.

There is virtually nothing accurate in this paragraph. We almost never played m2m that year. When we got down in games, we full court pressed relying upon McNeil to anchor the press with his shot blocking, but almost never m2m.

We had a huge lead on Auburn, and JB went into coast mode to shorten the game, and they hit shots at the end of the game. They didn't "shred" us in the 2nd half. They hit a flurry of shots over the last few minutes while we were trying to nurse a lead.

Texas did not "shred it wire to wire," either. They were a top scoring team, with a high powered offensive attack. Just because we didn't stymie them like IU in 2013 doesn't mean they "shredded" the zone. We led for the vast majority of the game, with the exception of them having a mini-run at the beginning of the second half where they took a short lived lead. What actually happened in the second half of that game was that it was a close game, with us clinging to a lead until we broke it open and built a double digit lead down the stretch that broke their backs.

Kansas didn't figure anything out against the zone. What in fact happened was that they pounded us on the offensive glass, which gave them extra possession after extra possession and enabled them to slowly chip away at the enormous lead we had. We got back defensively the entire game and shut down their vaunted transition game, and they didn't have great success attacking us in half court offensive sets a la Pitt, they just capitalized on our vulnerability on the offensive boards.

 

[jordoo]

2003 success factors:
Melo 75%
Balanced scoring 10%
Clutch performers 10%
Zone 5%

Off-hand I can think of only one game that year where the zone truly confused the opponent from start-to-finish: Oklahoma.

Oklahoma St diced it until we switched to pressing and m2m. Auburn shredded it in the 2nd half and we barely hung on. Texas shredded it wire-to-wire. Kansas figured it out in the second half and we scored just enough to hang on. If you rewind to the regular season, we lose those Pitt and ND classics at home if we stayed in the zone down the stretch. JB had a sliding scale where he would switch to m2m if we fell behind by 12 or more in the 2nd half. If anything, those results show just how remarkably steady the offense was that entire year.

Looking to the Hopkins era, the defense that we play is secondary to scoring points and resurrecting the transition game. But make no mistake, strictly zone will die with JB's departure. Hop may have to extend practice time though to teach more than one defense, if you believe Jimmy.

I'd agree that it was more offense and offensive balance that won out for us in 2003 especially the last two games. That said our defense was very solid all season long and the back line did a great job of challenging, blocking and changing shots.

What would your explanation for 2013 be? That was a team that struggled offensively but put a serious hurting on IU, Marq, and Mich in that tourney. We held Mich to 61pts on sub 40% shooting including only 25pts in the second half. We lost that game because of offense and only advanced as far as we did because the defense was stifling down the stretch run of the season. Had Brandon, James or MCW had a good shooting game against Mich we likely win and play Lville for a 4th time in the NC. We won at Lville that season, had a chance late to beat them at the Dome and had a big lead against them at MSG before collapsing. They were the eventual NC's and we played them as well as anyone did all season. So certainly you can win the NC on the strength of the 2-3 zone if its good enough, IMO.

Still I'm a proponent of having more than one option on defense and just switching it up every so often. In the end most NC teams have top 20ish defenses and offenses.

 

[jordoo]

There is virtually nothing accurate in this paragraph. We almost never played m2m that year. We full court pressed relying upon McNeil to anchor the press with his shot blocking, but almost never m2m.

We had a huge lead on Auburn, and JB went into coast mode to shorten the game, and they hit shots at the end of the game. They didn't "shred" us in the 2nd half. They hit a flurry of shots over the last few minutes while we were trying to nurse a lead.

Texas did not "shred it wire to wire," either. They were a top scoring team, with a high powered offensive attack. Just because we didn't stymie them like IU in 2013 doesn't mean they "shredded" the zone. We led for the vast majority of the game, with the exception of them having a mini-run at the beginning of the second half where they took a short lived lead. What actually happened in the second half of that game was that it was a close game, with us clinging to a lead until we broke it open and built a double digit lead down the stretch that broke their backs.

Kansas didn't figure anything out against the zone. What in fact happened was that they pounded us on the offensive glass, which gave them extra possession after extra possession and enabled them to slowly chip away at the enormous lead we had. We got back defensively the entire game and shut down their vaunted transition game, and they didn't have great success attacking us in half court offensive sets a la Pitt, they just capitalized on our vulnerability on the offensive boards.

Yep the Auburn game was a classic hair puller down the stretch that was never really in jeopordy. We controlled that one from start to finish even slowing down to nurse the lead we were controlling the pace. Was it Marquis Daniels that couldn't seem to miss in the last 10min?

I remember Moton had a blazing 1st half of shooting otherwise we would likely have had a good sized half time lead. They were a very good team who scored a ton of points that season running up and down the court. I wouldn't say they had serious trouble with the zone, it certainly bothered them at times but they simply had no one who could guard Melo even when they started sending help on the catch in the second half it didn't work.

Kansas must have had a record for scoring points on their own FT misses in that game. It was wild and the zone certainly had them befuddled for quite a while in the first half. Hinrick especially struggled against it and that was a KU team that had just rolled Marquette in the FF.

 

[Eric15]

When I was in 8th grade -- Hopkins first year as an assistant coach -- he sent me a personalized Christmas Card (his wife worked for my Dad at the time), and I've loved him ever since.

 

[FrancoPizza]

I'd agree that it was more offense and offensive balance that won out for us in 2003 especially the last two games. That said our defense was very solid all season long and the back line did a great job of challenging, blocking and changing shots.

What would your explanation for 2013 be? That was a team that struggled offensively but put a serious hurting on IU, Marq, and Mich in that tourney. We held Mich to 61pts on sub 40% shooting including only 25pts in the second half. We lost that game because of offense and only advanced as far as we did because the defense was stifling down the stretch run of the season. Had Brandon, James or MCW had a good shooting game against Mich we likely win and play Lville for a 4th time in the NC. We won at Lville that season, had a chance late to beat them at the Dome and had a big lead against them at MSG before collapsing. They were the eventual NC's and we played them as well as anyone did all season. So certainly you can win the NC on the strength of the 2-3 zone if its good enough, IMO.

Still I'm a proponent of having more than one option on defense and just switching it up every so often. In the end most NC teams have top 20ish defenses and offenses.

2012-13 was probably the best zone defense we've ever had, but it was tragically complemented by one of our most offensively challenged teams. And that's the part of the equation that gets overlooked -- to what extent does the zone help or hurt the transition game which, in most years, is relied upon for a hefty % of scoring. Why were the 2010 and 2012 teams so lethal in transition whereas 2013 wasn't?

If you ask me what's really wrong with JB's teams the last few seasons, it's not even a question of zone vs man... it's where the is the classic fast breaking style that made us fans back in the day? That's what we grew up with. Exciting basketball. We haven't had that since 2012. The final 4 was great as it kept our once-a-decade appearance on track, but that was a white-knuckle offense. Then Ennis cranked the white-knuckling up a notch. As long as we have Cooney "finishing" on the break, I don't think that's going to change. Is 2016-2017 the next chance at seeing what a fast break looks like?

 

[jordoo]

2012-13 was probably the best zone defense we've ever had, but it was tragically complemented by one of our most offensively challenged teams. And that's the part of the equation that gets overlooked -- to what extent does the zone help or hurt the transition game which, in most years, is relied upon for a hefty % of scoring. Why were the 2010 and 2012 teams so lethal in transition whereas 2013 wasn't?

If you ask me what's really wrong with JB's teams the last few seasons, it's not even a question of zone vs man... it's where the is the classic fast breaking style that made us fans back in the day? That's what we grew up with. Exciting basketball. We haven't had that since 2012. The final 4 was great as it kept our once-a-decade appearance on track, but that was a white-knuckle offense. Then Ennis cranked the white-knuckling up a notch. As long as we have Cooney "finishing" on the break, I don't think that's going to change. Is 2016-2017 the next chance at seeing what a fast break looks like?

Well you have changed the subject and dodged the question. I made the point, which you actually backed up for me above, that you absolutely can win the NC playing strictly 2-3 zone. If such an offensively challenged team like the 2013 squad can get a game away from the NC game which would have been against a team that they had beaten on the road earlier that season then it certainly can be done.

I agree that we have lacked the transition game in the past few years. Especially 13/14 with Ennis and 14/15 with Joseph.

 

[FrancoPizza]

If such an offensively challenged team like the 2013 squad can get a game away from the NC game

I think that statement lacks context. I honestly think our FF appearance in 2013 was a testament to the parity of college basketball in the same way that UConn won the whole thing. Getting to the FF certainly is not easy no matter the context, but having to beat Marquette in the elite 8 to punch our ticket? We were a very flawed much like the 1995-6 Wallace-led team. The only difference is there was no UK or UMass powerhouse waiting.

College hoops is broken and dying a slow death in this 1-and-done world.