Moyer Attracting Offers

[dasher]

I just want to say one more thing...
So many of you guys are 'funny' in how you react to this kind of thing. It's like... it's like if i go to a game, and someone in a Georgetown sweatshirt walks up to me and says "Syracuse sucks!" I'm likely to have one type of reaction. I'd be motivated to 'fight back.' But, if a friend/SU Alum walks up and says, "oh my god, our offense is such an atrocity this year, it's hard to watch" — well, then we're going to have a very different type of exchange. It's going to be amicable, and constructive, and we're going to end it very pleasantly, even if we have differing opinions on why, or to what degree.

Here, in this forum? So many of you treat fellow fans as if they're attacking your very person. And, so you need to retaliate. And then divide, so that you can feel like you're in the 'right club.'

If you really look at what i tend to write, most of it is either questions, or arguments about logic, debating assertions someone makes. Not insinuations about a that person's character or 'fan status.' About the quality of a statement. I thought that was the 'higher level' way to pursue things. Maybe not in a sports forum.

Please. Just stop. You are anything but a reasonable just want to debate a issue poster. There are plenty of them here. You ain't one.

 

[OrangeDW]

He was only a freshman, to say he wasn’t a good player isn’t accurate, he was still a work in progress. He was that high energy, rebounding kind of player who needed time to adjust. He’s not Josh wright or Caleb Joseph.

That remains to be seen. I was hopeful that he could be a good kid to have in the program that could eventually develop into a veteran role player and leader.

Josh Wright made the clinching FT’s in the Big East championship as well as a huge floater from the baseline late in the game. He did more at Cuse than Moyer did.

 

[Zelda Zonk]

You accuse people of having different opinions than you of being "loyalists". does that make you a "disloyalist"? Oh no, that makes you an objective observer. I mean, because you know alums, who think like you do but don't post here? In your world, everything is spun to be anti-jb. Everything is his fault. That is fine but understand you are about as reasonable in your observations as Townie or Nate. Just on the opposite view point. In this decade, we have been a #1 seed twice. You ignore that. In this decade we also had the best start of any Syracuse team in history. You ignore that. In this decade, we also went to two final fours that had nothing to do with the 2 #1 seed years. You also ignore the effects of the sanctions. Doesn't fit your narrative. And if you want to blame Jb for the sanctions, be my guest. But don't pretend that they haven't hurt us. See, I get that Jb isn't perfect. Far from it. He doesn't sit at the right hand of the father. I also get that we will never have as a good a coach again at Syracuse. The odds are just so against it.
It is really clear that the sweet 16 run just really hurt you. Right to your core. You even knock MSU to get at it. That team was 30-4 and won the Big 10. But damn it, there guard play wasn't good. In your eyes. lol Duke loses in OT, on a horrible call I might add, and boom, you use it to knock the zone. Pathetic. And make no mistake, if we had Virginia's record and lost to a #16 seed, you would be saying that I would rather have the sweet 16 season. You are very transparent. So perspective...

Almost good points, but tinged with your brand of spin again.
Firstly, you take "loyalist" to be a negative. Loyalty, to me, is a positive. If i use the word "apologist," that has a negative connotation. I don't use them interchangeably. Either way, if someone is a loyalist, that doesn't necessitate that there's an opposite appellation. I don't need there to be. If it's necessary, then sure, call them a "JB critic." And even though you paint me that way, you'd be hard-pressed to find a lot of actual statements from me that criticize JB. It comes across that way to some, because i ask the questions that probably lead there sometimes. I'll say it here, though: i'm not a fervent JB fan. I've said that before. I've also said that he's not on my list of "great coaches," and it's also just as important to know how many coaches any given person can have on their list. I have said that i 'like' him, mostly, and that he has been great for us. It's not a simple/simpleminded matter. I'm not sure why it should be. I've never even met him, and i'm supposed to have a binding, immovable, positive-only sentiment about him? There is no one and no thing in the world that i could/would be so singleminded about. No thing in the world that isn't as much subject to critique as praise... I don't like the zone. Regardless of when it's effective. I'd rather watch games in which no zone is played. Sue me. But, if you're objective, you ask any basketball fan in the world what kind of game they'd rather watch and see if you can find many outside of syracuse 'loyalists' who would say "zone." More importantly, ask recruits. If you can find some in the top 25 who say zone is their preference, i'd be suspicious of that kid.

You cite some fantastic accomplishments over the 'past decade.' Those aren't ignored. They just weren't relevant to this discussion. And my point is, that in building, continuing, and sustaining a program, the objective is to get great players, and what happened ten years ago just isn't as relevant to them as it is to a fan of 40 years. What Tyler Ennis' team did is eclipsed by what we have done in the past five years. Let's face some 'facts' (as i assume them to be). If you're a top 25 recruit, what are the odds that you want to play for: a coach who is 70+; who berates players on the sidelines and yanks them from games for simple mistakes; a team that finished 8th-11th in four consecutive seasons; hasn't been ranked in... i don't know how long; plays a non-NBA/pro defense; walks the ball up/doesn't fast break; scores in the 50s both routinely and as an objective; is fresh off sanctions; is on the bubble since you were in junior high and first started paying attention to such things... All of those things are things that are recognized and would be noted about the past five years. I don't think a current recruit is going to go back ten years to find great accomplishments toward making his decision today. I wouldn't. Would you? JB's 'history' is a matter for tv commentators and for long-standing fans—not today's recruits and building toward the next ten years, when, ostensibly, he's not even going to be here. So, again, no, i don't ignore the past. I just weigh what's more relevant toward future success. And it's silly to suggest that i 'ignore the history' when it's the history that has established my 'standards' for what i expect and would be "happy" with. When i started, we had Pearl. The next year, we went to the championship game. We were the captains/co-captains of our conference. That's my history. And it's largely irrelevant to anyone considering our program.

Ignore the effects of sanctions? No. I just don't ascribe as much responsibility to them as others. That's, again, a matter of perspective. For a few reasons. One, we're known for not playing a lot of bodies. Regardless of how many are on scholarship. Secondly, even if we had more bodies, what are the chances they'd be of the quality that would be higher than the ones who were on the team but still weren't getting enough minutes to satisfy them? Thirdly, who's responsible for the sanctions? Debate that all you like, but someone's in the big chair, and absolving him, even if you think we were overcharged (and i do) is still, in effect, apologizing for him.

Not sure why you have to twist the words into making such bombastic projections and assumptions for me. The sweet 16 "hurt me?" Where did you get that? You made it up. Entirely. I "knocked" MSU? Christ. Now i can't even be critical of a team we beat, because that somehow invalidates the win? Amazing! Well, i don't know, man. I watched the game. I saw what i saw, and the comment about them 'not having any guard play' came from another poster here in this forum. I merely agree with it. And i also said it was a great and glorious win, or some such. Why are you ignoring that?

Duke lost in OT on a horrible call... Alright. I guess if we're going to go in an micro-replay every tournament game, many things would have turned out differently. It's like giving us credit in the AO year/s for 'would've' won those games if not for... You either won them or you didn't. JB would have had a second championship if... You don't consider that to be 'spin?' And no, i wouldn't want to trade Virginia's season for a sweet 16. Again, your erroneous projection. Making stuff up to suit your "narrative." I said what i said, pretty clearly and i meant what i meant. Kinda "pathetic"—to use your unnecessarily inflammatory language—to try to re-state my position and tell me what i'm actually thinking.

 

[dasher]

Almost good points, but tinged with your brand of spin again.
Firstly, you take "loyalist" to be a negative. Loyalty, to me, is a positive. If i use the word "apologist," that has a negative connotation. I don't use them interchangeably. Either way, if someone is a loyalist, that doesn't necessitate that there's an opposite appellation. I don't need there to be. If it's necessary, then sure, call them a "JB critic." And even though you paint me that way, you'd be hard-pressed to find a lot of actual statements from me that criticize JB. It comes across that way to some, because i ask the questions that probably lead there sometimes. I'll say it here, though: i'm not a fervent JB fan. I've said that before. I've also said that he's not on my list of "great coaches," and it's also just as important to know how many coaches any given person can have on their list. I have said that i 'like' him, mostly, and that he has been great for us. It's not a simple/simpleminded matter. I'm not sure why it should be. I've never even met him, and i'm supposed to have a binding, immovable, positive-only sentiment about him? There is no one and no thing in the world that i could/would be so singleminded about. No thing in the world that isn't as much subject to critique as praise... I don't like the zone. Regardless of when it's effective. I'd rather watch games in which no zone is played. Sue me. But, if you're objective, you ask any basketball fan in the world what kind of game they'd rather watch and see if you can find many outside of syracuse 'loyalists' who would say "zone." More importantly, ask recruits. If you can find some in the top 25 who say zone is their preference, i'd be suspicious of that kid.

You cite some fantastic accomplishments over the 'past decade.' Those aren't ignored. They just weren't relevant to this discussion. And my point is, that in building, continuing, and sustaining a program, the objective is to get great players, and what happened ten years ago just isn't as relevant to them as it is to a fan of 40 years. What Tyler Ennis' team did is eclipsed by what we have done in the past five years. Let's face some 'facts' (as i assume them to be). If you're a top 25 recruit, what are the odds that you want to play for: a coach who is 70+; who berates players on the sidelines and yanks them from games for simple mistakes; a team that finished 8th-11th in four consecutive seasons; hasn't been ranked in... i don't know how long; plays a non-NBA/pro defense; walks the ball up/doesn't fast break; scores in the 50s both routinely and as an objective; is fresh off sanctions; is on the bubble since you were in junior high and first started paying attention to such things... All of those things are things that are recognized and would be noted about the past five years. I don't think a current recruit is going to go back ten years to find great accomplishments toward making his decision today. I wouldn't. Would you? JB's 'history' is a matter for tv commentators and for long-standing fans—not today's recruits and building toward the next ten years, when, ostensibly, he's not even going to be here. So, again, no, i don't ignore the past. I just weigh what's more relevant toward future success. And it's silly to suggest that i 'ignore the history' when it's the history that has established my 'standards' for what i expect and would be "happy" with. When i started, we had Pearl. The next year, we went to the championship game. We were the captains/co-captains of our conference. That's my history. And it's largely irrelevant to anyone considering our program.

Ignore the effects of sanctions? No. I just don't ascribe as much responsibility to them as others. That's, again, a matter of perspective. For a few reasons. One, we're known for not playing a lot of bodies. Regardless of how many are on scholarship. Secondly, even if we had more bodies, what are the chances they'd be of the quality that would be higher than the ones who were on the team but still weren't getting enough minutes to satisfy them? Thirdly, who's responsible for the sanctions? Debate that all you like, but someone's in the big chair, and absolving him, even if you think we were overcharged (and i do) is still, in effect, apologizing for him.

Not sure why you have to twist the words into making such bombastic projections and assumptions for me. The sweet 16 "hurt me?" Where did you get that? You made it up. Entirely. I "knocked" MSU? Christ. Now i can't even be critical of a team we beat, because that somehow invalidates the win? Amazing! Well, i don't know, man. I watched the game. I saw what i saw, and the comment about them 'not having any guard play' came from another poster here in this forum. I merely agree with it. And i also said it was a great and glorious win, or some such. Why are you ignoring that?

Duke lost in OT on a horrible call... Alright. I guess if we're going to go in an micro-replay every tournament game, many things would have turned out differently. It's like giving us credit in the AO year/s for 'would've' won those games if not for... You either won them or you didn't. JB would have had a second championship if... You don't consider that to be 'spin?' And no, i wouldn't want to trade Virginia's season for a sweet 16. Again, your erroneous projection. Making stuff up to suit your "narrative." I said what i said, pretty clearly and i meant what i meant. Kinda "pathetic"—to use your unnecessarily inflammatory language—to try to re-state my position and tell me what i'm actually thinking.

I was just calling them as I see them. And I see you the way I see you. And as I am a pretty good poker player, I can read people pretty well. And you are honestly, easier to read than a Mickey dees menu. Oh, and you are entitled to your opinion. As I am to mine. Just as an aside, what would Jb have had to do to be on your list of great coaches? He had the best record in what you and I would agree was one of the three best leagues of all time. So, what is he missing?

 

[AZOrange]

Almost good points, but tinged with your brand of spin again.
Firstly, you take "loyalist" to be a negative. Loyalty, to me, is a positive. If i use the word "apologist," that has a negative connotation. I don't use them interchangeably. Either way, if someone is a loyalist, that doesn't necessitate that there's an opposite appellation. I don't need there to be. If it's necessary, then sure, call them a "JB critic." And even though you paint me that way, you'd be hard-pressed to find a lot of actual statements from me that criticize JB. It comes across that way to some, because i ask the questions that probably lead there sometimes. I'll say it here, though: i'm not a fervent JB fan. I've said that before. I've also said that he's not on my list of "great coaches," and it's also just as important to know how many coaches any given person can have on their list. I have said that i 'like' him, mostly, and that he has been great for us. It's not a simple/simpleminded matter. I'm not sure why it should be. I've never even met him, and i'm supposed to have a binding, immovable, positive-only sentiment about him? There is no one and no thing in the world that i could/would be so singleminded about. No thing in the world that isn't as much subject to critique as praise... I don't like the zone. Regardless of when it's effective. I'd rather watch games in which no zone is played. Sue me. But, if you're objective, you ask any basketball fan in the world what kind of game they'd rather watch and see if you can find many outside of syracuse 'loyalists' who would say "zone." More importantly, ask recruits. If you can find some in the top 25 who say zone is their preference, i'd be suspicious of that kid.

You cite some fantastic accomplishments over the 'past decade.' Those aren't ignored. They just weren't relevant to this discussion. And my point is, that in building, continuing, and sustaining a program, the objective is to get great players, and what happened ten years ago just isn't as relevant to them as it is to a fan of 40 years. What Tyler Ennis' team did is eclipsed by what we have done in the past five years. Let's face some 'facts' (as i assume them to be). If you're a top 25 recruit, what are the odds that you want to play for: a coach who is 70+; who berates players on the sidelines and yanks them from games for simple mistakes; a team that finished 8th-11th in four consecutive seasons; hasn't been ranked in... i don't know how long; plays a non-NBA/pro defense; walks the ball up/doesn't fast break; scores in the 50s both routinely and as an objective; is fresh off sanctions; is on the bubble since you were in junior high and first started paying attention to such things... All of those things are things that are recognized and would be noted about the past five years. I don't think a current recruit is going to go back ten years to find great accomplishments toward making his decision today. I wouldn't. Would you? JB's 'history' is a matter for tv commentators and for long-standing fans—not today's recruits and building toward the next ten years, when, ostensibly, he's not even going to be here. So, again, no, i don't ignore the past. I just weigh what's more relevant toward future success. And it's silly to suggest that i 'ignore the history' when it's the history that has established my 'standards' for what i expect and would be "happy" with. When i started, we had Pearl. The next year, we went to the championship game. We were the captains/co-captains of our conference. That's my history. And it's largely irrelevant to anyone considering our program.

Ignore the effects of sanctions? No. I just don't ascribe as much responsibility to them as others. That's, again, a matter of perspective. For a few reasons. One, we're known for not playing a lot of bodies. Regardless of how many are on scholarship. Secondly, even if we had more bodies, what are the chances they'd be of the quality that would be higher than the ones who were on the team but still weren't getting enough minutes to satisfy them? Thirdly, who's responsible for the sanctions? Debate that all you like, but someone's in the big chair, and absolving him, even if you think we were overcharged (and i do) is still, in effect, apologizing for him.

Not sure why you have to twist the words into making such bombastic projections and assumptions for me. The sweet 16 "hurt me?" Where did you get that? You made it up. Entirely. I "knocked" MSU? Christ. Now i can't even be critical of a team we beat, because that somehow invalidates the win? Amazing! Well, i don't know, man. I watched the game. I saw what i saw, and the comment about them 'not having any guard play' came from another poster here in this forum. I merely agree with it. And i also said it was a great and glorious win, or some such. Why are you ignoring that?

Duke lost in OT on a horrible call... Alright. I guess if we're going to go in an micro-replay every tournament game, many things would have turned out differently. It's like giving us credit in the AO year/s for 'would've' won those games if not for... You either won them or you didn't. JB would have had a second championship if... You don't consider that to be 'spin?' And no, i wouldn't want to trade Virginia's season for a sweet 16. Again, your erroneous projection. Making stuff up to suit your "narrative." I said what i said, pretty clearly and i meant what i meant. Kinda "pathetic"—to use your unnecessarily inflammatory language—to try to re-state my position and tell me what i'm actually thinking.

Hey man how about keeping it pithy and saving my eyeballs? Thx!

 

[dasher]

Hey man how about keeping it pithy and saving my eyeballs? Thx!

lol the thing is, it's a Saturday. I was going to pass on this because of the length. But, I didn't.

 

[pearl31]

Always ‘funny’ when debating simple logic triggers the ‘loyalists,’ who then don’t bother to deal with the actual arguments.

Not sure how you can insist upon having it ‘both ways’ all the time. You said, “Jimmy knows how to coach” in response to Cuse Action’s statement that “Moyer is attracting offers from a lot of quality programs. Interesting that they see something in the kid.”

So, Jimmy initially also ‘saw something in the kid.’ But, then what happened? Jimmy knows how to coach, but couldn’t get that something out of the kid? Or, are you blaming the kid? Oh, and then you proceeded to insult the OP, because he said JB ‘ran moyer out.’ So, which is it? When JB has a success, it’s all from JB. When there’s a player ‘failure’—performing below (our) expectations, a transfer, early NBA stuff—that’s all on the player. And even though there have been an inordinate number of such ‘failures’ with our program, they’re never on JB, right? Another example: Marek. Marek really developed those last few games. Boeheim apologists will assert that "JB gets the most out of a player." But, to concede that, you have to believe that that player could not/should not have been better an an earlier stage. I/others might suggest that those simple things that Marek began to be competent at, he should have been competent at much sooner. Perspective.

And again—so it’s clear, because it’s obvious you either don’t understand or don’t care—i’m debating logic, not facts, because there are no facts. Not that we will actually know. This, to me, is about objectivity, perspectives, and the psychology of it all.

Back to Moyer. Moyer was good enough in High School to be a recruiting target for us. Wasn’t he Mr Basketball in Ohio or some such? He’s a high character kid. Very intelligent. But, somehow, uncoachable now?

So, now to your deflections and spin. You laced them all together into one simple conglomeration of ‘perspective,’ i can’t answer them that way. Am i happy with making the tournament. I wouldn’t call it ‘happy.’ Relieved, maybe? Glad, definitely. But, no, not “Happy” to see us on the bubble. Again. Discussed ad nauseam in the media as being a bubble team again. Not happy to see us in a Play In Game(!). I felt like Jim Mora. Play In Game? Play In? We’re talkin’ about a Play In Game? I always thought of play in games as being for teams like South by Southwest Cactus Tech. But, Syracuse in a play in game? Oy. And before you completely absorb your panties, don’t get me wrong. Again. Getting in is better, of course, than not. But, a play in game doesn’t make me “happy.”

Next. UVA. Let’s get this out of the way. Yes. I’d have been happier being UVA. And here’s where ‘perspective’ comes back in. This site is its own bubble. Of all the people i know who are SU Alums and basketball heads, most don’t think the way the JB Loyalists do here. So, don’t think that this site always represents objectivity, truth, or the full demographic. Anyway, yeah, i think UVA had the better season. People here used “Sweet Sixteen” to feel better about the season. I don’t need to ‘feel better.’ I want to feel ‘accurately.’ And maybe i just have different objectives than you do.

My ‘objective’ (as if i had anything to do with it) is to have a team that is good enough to win a National Championship. The second ‘bar’ is not so much a standard as an accomplishment. A team that reaches the Final Four is a ‘bar’ for me. Sweet Sixteen isn’t one. Seems like a cute bit of marketing business. But, whatever. So, we won a play-in game against another team that had a not very successful season. How did i feel about that? Again, relieved. Glad. But, i didn’t take it as some great sign of success. We should have won that game. Right? Then TCU. They had the same number of wins as us, but in a lame(r) conference. So, again, relief, gladness, not a sense of tremendous accomplishment. We did what we should have done. MSU. That was a big win. Again, relief, and a bit of happiness, i guess. But, watching the actual game, and not relying solely on their seeding or yearlong rankings? I didn’t see a great team in them. We can say ‘the zone shut down their two stars.’ I’ll concede that. But, they had no guard play. To me, it’s incredibly surprising that they were so good all year, but whatever.

The perspective thing again…. In those three games, commentators harped on the fact that we play a zone. And any time it did anything, they’d pounce on another threadbare opportunity to mention that we play zone, and how much it has been stifling the opponent. Even after the first game(?), they were ranting about it. And then they showed the stats. On my (bad) memory, it was something like we held them to 38% FG percentage for the game. Whoa! Amazing defense! But, then, right next to it was the stat that they held us to 36%. And no one ever mentioned that they were doing it with M2M…. Same with the second game, and the third….. That’s the way it is. Commentators throw out that simple nugget because it’s simple and easy to recognize and digest, but other teams are defending us better than we’re defending them, and because M2M is the ‘industry standard’/default, it’s invisible somehow. One of those first two teams held all three of our three highest scoring players under their averages, and no one mentioned it. Battle was pretty well contained, and no one mentioned it….

What percentage of the Final Four's teams' defense is zone? When we reach a FF, it's because of the zone, but for everyone else, it's not because of M2M? Where's Duke right now, with all of their superstars, using their stolen zone?

Okay, so back to UVA. To me, a Sweet Sixteen is a nice thing. It’s a couple of weeks of enjoyment for our fans. But, it doesn’t indicate the quality of the team. UVA had a team that was good enough to win the entire thing. We didn’t. So, to assert that we had a better ‘season’ than they did because they happened to go out in the first round seems odd to me. I get it—that if your primary objective is to win the Championship, then each step along the way is a ‘credit,’ and they earned no credits. And now they’re also a footnote and commentators will be talking about them being the first to lose to a 16. And each time they do that, they’ll be mentioning that they were a No. 1 seed. While, honestly, i don’t believe anyone outside of our bubble really gives a damn that we made the Sweet 16. It’s not going to be impressive to recruits—who will also look at our 11th place conference finish. And bubble status. So, i asked, how do you reconcile the season? It's a question, not an assertion, but so many of your are so sensitive about anyone questioning anything related to Orange... Finishing so far down in-conference should surely be telling about the quality of our program this year. But, it also wasn’t an aberration. Last year, the year before, the year before….. How many middle of the pack and below seasons do we have to sustain before we actually are that team? Yeah, i’ll take UVA’s wire to wire top-rankedness. Wire to wire excellence. Each game, going into it knowing you’ll win. No team controversies. Playing a (slightly) more exciting game. With a coach of the year. And doing it with only one player recruited out of the top 50 (i think). And they’ll be there again next year.

The Challenges. The kid that dropped out. I don’t know the entire situation there. There was discussion about a medical issue partially related to his injury. And then speculation about his dissatisfaction with minutes. Part of a coach’s responsibility is in managing a player. We’ve had a lot of defections for one reason or another, so i can’t fully trust that all of these issues are the fault of the player. I don’t know what discussions were had, or what the player expected in terms of time, but i can absolutely see that he wasn’t happy with his time, given his status/age/year. The injuries…. Sidibe was affected. Washington wouldn’t have played much. Other teams have injuries, too. So, it’s all a part of the fabric of the season. I’m challenged to recognize which games/if any were affected by not having Howard Washington, and i’m not going to speculate on how much more effective Sidibe could have been, since he still would have been splitting minutes with Chukwu, and Chukwu did develop a bit toward the end.

But, again, this goes into perspective, and how you want to look at things. If we were good enough to beat Michigan State, why weren’t we good enough to win a few of those games we lost to inferior teams? If you give JB credit for being ‘the master’ in the tournament, are you also suggesting he only ‘turned it on’ at the end? Why not be the master in the lead-up, so that we’re not on the bubble? So that we win more conference games? Looking at some of the comments, it’s like people are suggesting JB is playing 3D chess, showing only enough to get us into the field, so that we can spring our vaunted 2-3 on them and confuse them into losing to us. So, if you consider a Sweet Sixteen a ‘run’ into a successful season, how do you then ignore what happened before that? And didn’t we ‘suffer’ for four months before the two week ‘glee period?’ That doesn’t matter?

“The team greatly overachieved.”
Well, no. Not so much. We finished with a win total and conference standing that was pretty close to what the consensus here predicted. And we were on the bubble, which is what just about everyone predicted. I don’t think anyone here, even the most diehard debbie downers, thinks we can’t win a couple of games once we get into the NCAA field. And that’s what we did. And then we shocked Michigan State. To some, that seems to overwrite everything before it. To others, it was a big/lovely/beautiful win. Period. Perspective. The only thing that bothers me about one of those perspectives is the insistence that everyone should feel the same way, and the incredulity when that doesn’t happen.

“Boeheim led this ragtag bunch to the sweet 16, and has proven to be quite effective at his job.”
Ooof. Ragtag bunch. We had two players who will be drafted into the NBA. Not a lot of our opponents had that. We had a 7’2” center who JB said last year was going to be a significant disruptor and “block a lot of shots.” We had a pro from a euro league. We had a junior point guard. A first team all acc freshman PF. A Jordan Brand Game backup center (however hobbled). Against anyone in our league not called Duke or North Carolina, that’s not a ragtag bunch. But, again, Sweet 16—music to some ears. But, in most cases, it only takes two wins to reach it. Beautiful that we did, but not an indicator of team quality, in my estimation. We were not a better team than UVA. Saying JB has proven to be quite effective isn’t the same as saying he is effective. We were 8-10 in conference. 8-10! Look at the teams that finished ahead of us, and tell me you were satisfied with the season. 9th the year before. 10th the year before that. 8th before that. That’s “quite effective?” We have one ACC tournament win. That’s “quite effective?” So, perspective….

People want to believe certain things, and they tend to look for ways to believe them.

What matters most here? A sweet sixteen. Does that build our program? Is that something that will be impressive to a recruit? Versus being ranked in the top three for an entire season, even with a tourney flameout. Was our sweet sixteen really that gratifying to you? Because why? Do you consider ASU and TCU to have been significant accomplishments? MSU, sure, i get that, but how do you need to weight those three wins to override the rest of the year? That’s an earnest question.

Again—instead of flaming the person, how about discussing the arguments. Or, whatever. I don't care. Some of this is from conversations i've been having with alums (real fans who are just as dedicated as you lot, but don't park themselves here because of the "unreasoned fanaticism")... So, have at it.

whoa

 

[br801]

That remains to be seen. I was hopeful that he could be a good kid to have in the program that could eventually develop into a veteran role player and leader.

Josh Wright made the clinching FT’s in the Big East championship as well as a huge floater from the baseline late in the game. He did more at Cuse than Moyer did.

Wright also came up big in the second game of that BET when SU knocked out UConn.

 

[OrangeTarheel]

Can we rename this thread The Legend of Zelda?

 

[Day2]

Can we rename this thread The Legend of Zelda?

I refuse to believe the people liking his posts read every word.

 

[FRANKIEFAN]

He was terrible. I'm sorry, it's the truth. Could he have got better down the road? I don't know. I think so. I hope so. But he hurt us when he was on the floor. That is why he saw his time decrease the way he did.

Athleticism was what got him highly ranked and recruited by us. And you could tell that he was coming off a serious knee injury.

The 2nd redshirt is probably good for him. We lost a frustrating player who can't be counted on to make free throws couldn't make a good play without making a mistake right before/after. But if he drops down a level and gets 100% healthy knee and ankle he will be the best athlete on the court every time he suits up in that conference. People saying he only has 2 years to play haven't been paying attention to how things work he absolutely will be granted the first redshirt year back expect him to be a stud 4 years from now when hes still playing and is 25 or so.

 

[br801]

Athleticism was what got him highly ranked and recruited by us. And you could tell that he was coming off a serious knee injury.

The 2nd redshirt is probably good for him. We lost a frustrating player who can't be counted on to make free throws couldn't make a good play without making a mistake right before/after. But if he drops down a level and gets 100% healthy knee and ankle he will be the best athlete on the court every time he suits up in that conference. People saying he only has 2 years to play haven't been paying attention to how things work he absolutely will be granted the first redshirt year back expect him to be a stud 4 years from now when hes still playing and is 25 or so.

He's not getting a second redshirt and probably doesn't want one anyway. Moyer doesn't strike me as someone who wants to spend six years as a collegiate basketball player.

 

[SaltLakeOrange]

Did you watch the games this year? Maybe in a few years he could be a player for us. But not today. And last I looked, he left on his own.

Weren’t you the guy who said we had no talent this year and that all would be better next year? Well next year is looking to be a lot like this year, a team with no depth at forward and questionble depth elsewhere. I’m wondering, had JB spent time developing Matt instead of trashing him in press conferences, if he’d of stayed?

JB, for all his strengths, has a few weaknesss. One of which is deciding way early who can play and who can’t. And those who can’t get little opportunity for error. They either put up with 4 years of crap or leave.

 

[dasher]

Weren’t you the guy who said we had no talent this year and that all would be better next year? Well next year is looking to be a lot like this year, a team with no depth at forward and questionble depth elsewhere. I’m wondering, had JB spent time developing Matt instead of trashing him in press conferences, if he’d of stayed?

JB, for all his strengths, has a few weaknesss. One of which is deciding way early who can play and who can’t. And those who can’t get little opportunity for error. They either put up with 4 years of crap or leave.

I think next year will be much better. I expect after watching this team for the past 43 years that guys improve from one year to the next. Especially frosh to soph. I also thought we would have Bazley but even without him, I think we will be better. Here is why. We tend to lump the whole season in to one big lump. At the end of the season we were better than at the beginning. we turned what were close losses in to close wins. We did that because we went from 3 guys that could score to 4. I think Sidibe can take us to 5. Time will tell on that one. am I right or are you right that we will be no better than the beginning of this season. We will have to wait to find out. By the way, I don't disagree with your take that Moyer, down the road, could help us. But overall, I don't think he is any loss next year.

 

[Orange Barrel]

Only a 115 mile trip on game days. I'm sure his parents will get to know the medical staff really well.

They'll save a bundle on aviation fuel too.

 

[CaptainJ]

The default doesn’t always have to be worst case or a conspiracy. Bazley and Moyer.

I actually agree with Bees. To be fair, the default doesnt always have to be to toe the company line, either. Often, there is an in between that neither "side" will be completely comfortable with.

 

[NKR1978]

Always ‘funny’ when debating simple logic triggers the ‘loyalists,’ who then don’t bother to deal with the actual arguments.

Not sure how you can insist upon having it ‘both ways’ all the time. You said, “Jimmy knows how to coach” in response to Cuse Action’s statement that “Moyer is attracting offers from a lot of quality programs. Interesting that they see something in the kid.”

So, Jimmy initially also ‘saw something in the kid.’ But, then what happened? Jimmy knows how to coach, but couldn’t get that something out of the kid? Or, are you blaming the kid? Oh, and then you proceeded to insult the OP, because he said JB ‘ran moyer out.’ So, which is it? When JB has a success, it’s all from JB. When there’s a player ‘failure’—performing below (our) expectations, a transfer, early NBA stuff—that’s all on the player. And even though there have been an inordinate number of such ‘failures’ with our program, they’re never on JB, right? Another example: Marek. Marek really developed those last few games. Boeheim apologists will assert that "JB gets the most out of a player." But, to concede that, you have to believe that that player could not/should not have been better an an earlier stage. I/others might suggest that those simple things that Marek began to be competent at, he should have been competent at much sooner. Perspective.

And again—so it’s clear, because it’s obvious you either don’t understand or don’t care—i’m debating logic, not facts, because there are no facts. Not that we will actually know. This, to me, is about objectivity, perspectives, and the psychology of it all.

Back to Moyer. Moyer was good enough in High School to be a recruiting target for us. Wasn’t he Mr Basketball in Ohio or some such? He’s a high character kid. Very intelligent. But, somehow, uncoachable now?

So, now to your deflections and spin. You laced them all together into one simple conglomeration of ‘perspective,’ i can’t answer them that way. Am i happy with making the tournament. I wouldn’t call it ‘happy.’ Relieved, maybe? Glad, definitely. But, no, not “Happy” to see us on the bubble. Again. Discussed ad nauseam in the media as being a bubble team again. Not happy to see us in a Play In Game(!). I felt like Jim Mora. Play In Game? Play In? We’re talkin’ about a Play In Game? I always thought of play in games as being for teams like South by Southwest Cactus Tech. But, Syracuse in a play in game? Oy. And before you completely absorb your panties, don’t get me wrong. Again. Getting in is better, of course, than not. But, a play in game doesn’t make me “happy.”

Next. UVA. Let’s get this out of the way. Yes. I’d have been happier being UVA. And here’s where ‘perspective’ comes back in. This site is its own bubble. Of all the people i know who are SU Alums and basketball heads, most don’t think the way the JB Loyalists do here. So, don’t think that this site always represents objectivity, truth, or the full demographic. Anyway, yeah, i think UVA had the better season. People here used “Sweet Sixteen” to feel better about the season. I don’t need to ‘feel better.’ I want to feel ‘accurately.’ And maybe i just have different objectives than you do.

My ‘objective’ (as if i had anything to do with it) is to have a team that is good enough to win a National Championship. The second ‘bar’ is not so much a standard as an accomplishment. A team that reaches the Final Four is a ‘bar’ for me. Sweet Sixteen isn’t one. Seems like a cute bit of marketing business. But, whatever. So, we won a play-in game against another team that had a not very successful season. How did i feel about that? Again, relieved. Glad. But, i didn’t take it as some great sign of success. We should have won that game. Right? Then TCU. They had the same number of wins as us, but in a lame(r) conference. So, again, relief, gladness, not a sense of tremendous accomplishment. We did what we should have done. MSU. That was a big win. Again, relief, and a bit of happiness, i guess. But, watching the actual game, and not relying solely on their seeding or yearlong rankings? I didn’t see a great team in them. We can say ‘the zone shut down their two stars.’ I’ll concede that. But, they had no guard play. To me, it’s incredibly surprising that they were so good all year, but whatever.

The perspective thing again…. In those three games, commentators harped on the fact that we play a zone. And any time it did anything, they’d pounce on another threadbare opportunity to mention that we play zone, and how much it has been stifling the opponent. Even after the first game(?), they were ranting about it. And then they showed the stats. On my (bad) memory, it was something like we held them to 38% FG percentage for the game. Whoa! Amazing defense! But, then, right next to it was the stat that they held us to 36%. And no one ever mentioned that they were doing it with M2M…. Same with the second game, and the third….. That’s the way it is. Commentators throw out that simple nugget because it’s simple and easy to recognize and digest, but other teams are defending us better than we’re defending them, and because M2M is the ‘industry standard’/default, it’s invisible somehow. One of those first two teams held all three of our three highest scoring players under their averages, and no one mentioned it. Battle was pretty well contained, and no one mentioned it….

What percentage of the Final Four's teams' defense is zone? When we reach a FF, it's because of the zone, but for everyone else, it's not because of M2M? Where's Duke right now, with all of their superstars, using their stolen zone?

Okay, so back to UVA. To me, a Sweet Sixteen is a nice thing. It’s a couple of weeks of enjoyment for our fans. But, it doesn’t indicate the quality of the team. UVA had a team that was good enough to win the entire thing. We didn’t. So, to assert that we had a better ‘season’ than they did because they happened to go out in the first round seems odd to me. I get it—that if your primary objective is to win the Championship, then each step along the way is a ‘credit,’ and they earned no credits. And now they’re also a footnote and commentators will be talking about them being the first to lose to a 16. And each time they do that, they’ll be mentioning that they were a No. 1 seed. While, honestly, i don’t believe anyone outside of our bubble really gives a damn that we made the Sweet 16. It’s not going to be impressive to recruits—who will also look at our 11th place conference finish. And bubble status. So, i asked, how do you reconcile the season? It's a question, not an assertion, but so many of your are so sensitive about anyone questioning anything related to Orange... Finishing so far down in-conference should surely be telling about the quality of our program this year. But, it also wasn’t an aberration. Last year, the year before, the year before….. How many middle of the pack and below seasons do we have to sustain before we actually are that team? Yeah, i’ll take UVA’s wire to wire top-rankedness. Wire to wire excellence. Each game, going into it knowing you’ll win. No team controversies. Playing a (slightly) more exciting game. With a coach of the year. And doing it with only one player recruited out of the top 50 (i think). And they’ll be there again next year.

The Challenges. The kid that dropped out. I don’t know the entire situation there. There was discussion about a medical issue partially related to his injury. And then speculation about his dissatisfaction with minutes. Part of a coach’s responsibility is in managing a player. We’ve had a lot of defections for one reason or another, so i can’t fully trust that all of these issues are the fault of the player. I don’t know what discussions were had, or what the player expected in terms of time, but i can absolutely see that he wasn’t happy with his time, given his status/age/year. The injuries…. Sidibe was affected. Washington wouldn’t have played much. Other teams have injuries, too. So, it’s all a part of the fabric of the season. I’m challenged to recognize which games/if any were affected by not having Howard Washington, and i’m not going to speculate on how much more effective Sidibe could have been, since he still would have been splitting minutes with Chukwu, and Chukwu did develop a bit toward the end.

But, again, this goes into perspective, and how you want to look at things. If we were good enough to beat Michigan State, why weren’t we good enough to win a few of those games we lost to inferior teams? If you give JB credit for being ‘the master’ in the tournament, are you also suggesting he only ‘turned it on’ at the end? Why not be the master in the lead-up, so that we’re not on the bubble? So that we win more conference games? Looking at some of the comments, it’s like people are suggesting JB is playing 3D chess, showing only enough to get us into the field, so that we can spring our vaunted 2-3 on them and confuse them into losing to us. So, if you consider a Sweet Sixteen a ‘run’ into a successful season, how do you then ignore what happened before that? And didn’t we ‘suffer’ for four months before the two week ‘glee period?’ That doesn’t matter?

“The team greatly overachieved.”
Well, no. Not so much. We finished with a win total and conference standing that was pretty close to what the consensus here predicted. And we were on the bubble, which is what just about everyone predicted. I don’t think anyone here, even the most diehard debbie downers, thinks we can’t win a couple of games once we get into the NCAA field. And that’s what we did. And then we shocked Michigan State. To some, that seems to overwrite everything before it. To others, it was a big/lovely/beautiful win. Period. Perspective. The only thing that bothers me about one of those perspectives is the insistence that everyone should feel the same way, and the incredulity when that doesn’t happen.

“Boeheim led this ragtag bunch to the sweet 16, and has proven to be quite effective at his job.”
Ooof. Ragtag bunch. We had two players who will be drafted into the NBA. Not a lot of our opponents had that. We had a 7’2” center who JB said last year was going to be a significant disruptor and “block a lot of shots.” We had a pro from a euro league. We had a junior point guard. A first team all acc freshman PF. A Jordan Brand Game backup center (however hobbled). Against anyone in our league not called Duke or North Carolina, that’s not a ragtag bunch. But, again, Sweet 16—music to some ears. But, in most cases, it only takes two wins to reach it. Beautiful that we did, but not an indicator of team quality, in my estimation. We were not a better team than UVA. Saying JB has proven to be quite effective isn’t the same as saying he is effective. We were 8-10 in conference. 8-10! Look at the teams that finished ahead of us, and tell me you were satisfied with the season. 9th the year before. 10th the year before that. 8th before that. That’s “quite effective?” We have one ACC tournament win. That’s “quite effective?” So, perspective….

People want to believe certain things, and they tend to look for ways to believe them.

What matters most here? A sweet sixteen. Does that build our program? Is that something that will be impressive to a recruit? Versus being ranked in the top three for an entire season, even with a tourney flameout. Was our sweet sixteen really that gratifying to you? Because why? Do you consider ASU and TCU to have been significant accomplishments? MSU, sure, i get that, but how do you need to weight those three wins to override the rest of the year? That’s an earnest question.

Again—instead of flaming the person, how about discussing the arguments. Or, whatever. I don't care. Some of this is from conversations i've been having with alums (real fans who are just as dedicated as you lot, but don't park themselves here because of the "unreasoned fanaticism")... So, have at it.

I bet you were the first one in line complaining that we didn’t make it to a Final Four after gaudy regular season records from 2010-12.

 

[Col. Bleep]

Losing Matthew Moyer like that suggests to me that there is something wrong with Orange basketball.
Not in the W's & L's.
But in the way the program sees itself and its mission.

Moyer is the kind of kid SU - or any team - should have been glad and proud to have and keep.
He wanted to be there, he seemed to care about academics and he worked and played hard.

Limited upside...perhaps.
But he's the kind of kid who could have developed into one of those 4-year contributors the Orange have developed (or used to) over the years.

Instead, he obviously had his mind made up to leave as soon as the season was over.
Something drove him away.
Maybe Boeheim's public comments...maybe more.
But it's wrong.

If we're just about W's and L's... we shouldn't complain about tactics other places use to land players.
We shouldn't care about one and dones.
And we probably shouldn't pretend to be a real "college" team.
Because college and the college experience apparently mean little, if anything.

And I'm honestly sad about that and about losing a guy like Matthew Moyer.
Because it means that when you get right down to it, my alma mater team stands for little.

 

[Madbiker]

Losing Matthew Moyer like that suggests to me that there is something wrong with Orange basketball.
Not in the W's & L's.
But in the way the program sees itself and its mission.

Moyer is the kind of kid SU - or any team - should have been glad and proud to have and keep.
He wanted to be there, he seemed to care about academics and he worked and played hard.

Limited upside...perhaps.
But he's the kind of kid who could have developed into one of those 4-year contributors the Orange have developed (or used to) over the years.

Instead, he obviously had his mind made up to leave as soon as the season was over.
Something drove him away.
Maybe Boeheim's public comments...maybe more.
But it's wrong.

If we're just about W's and L's... we shouldn't complain about tactics other places use to land players.
We shouldn't care about one and dones.
And we probably shouldn't pretend to be a real "college" team.
Because college and the college experience apparently mean little, if anything.

And I'm honestly sad about that and about losing a guy like Matthew Moyer.
Because it means that when you get right down to it, my alma mater team stands for little.

I don't know what went down between JB and Moyer's parents regarding his injury. But it was clear that with the forwards we expected to have next year that Moyer was not going to play much. So ultimately I assume this decision to leave was about PT.

 

[All4SU]

My take on Moyer seems to be different than most in here. I think he seems like a good kid, a smart kid, who lost all of his confidence. When he did get into games he gave good effort but probably over-thought things. His job was rebounding and defense. He obviously has a knack for rebounding.

If a kid like that needs s fresh start someplace, I’m all for it. He will probably never be an NBA player. But that doesn’t mean he can’t contribute to some college team. He just needs to clear his head and regain some confidence. I think JB knew that. But JB has his hands full this year managing the inexperience of a squad that was held together with duct tape.

Best of luck to Moyer.

 

[SaltLakeOrange]

I don't know what went down between JB and Moyer's parents regarding his injury. But it was clear that with the forwards we expected to have next year that Moyer was not going to play much. So ultimately I assume this decision to leave was about PT.

Disagree. It was about respect. Matt respected SU, wanted to be here. Wanted to contribute. Was willing to work his ass off to get some playing time. Came back while still injured.

And got thrown under the bus by his coach...that’s why he left...

 

[Madbiker]

Disagree. It was about respect. Matt respected SU, wanted to be here. Wanted to contribute. Was willing to work his ass off to get some playing time. Came back while still injured.

And got thrown under the bus by his coach...that’s why he left...

Not sure how this was about respect. JB plays the guys who produce the most and he doesn't give bench players minutes just to participate. He has always done that. Moyer wasn't treated any differently.

 

[FRANKIEFAN]

Disagree. It was about respect. Matt respected SU, wanted to be here. Wanted to contribute. Was willing to work his ass off to get some playing time. Came back while still injured.

And got thrown under the bus by his coach...that’s why he left...

He left because he had zero shot to see the court next year with Bazley/Oshae/Marek ahead of him. Boeheim could have offered to be his butler and clean his apartment on south and it would have made no difference if he would have only played with the walkons next year.

Obviously more PT has opened up at his position since his announcement but he isn't nostradamus.

 

[two3zone]

Not sure how this was about respect. JB plays the guys who produce the most and he doesn't give bench players minutes just to participate. He has always done that. Moyer wasn't treated any differently.

Talking about one of his players parents during a post game presser is something we’ve seen the past from our coach? That seems different.

 

[310Pigpen]

Jimmy B the big bad wolf!