Of these three things what would you like to see Syracuse do more?

[moqui]

I'm going to say none of the above . . . Boeheim's system is humming right now and has been knocking at the door for 4 of the last 5 years. That's really all you can ask for. Why change what's working so well?

But as for the options presented, I'll just point out that 3 requires 1, but 1 does not necessarily guarantee 3.

 

[manleyzoo]

1. Play the bench more?

2. Switch defenses from time to time?

3. Press more?

None of the above?

All of the above?

One or two of the above, if so which ones?

Knock off the ultra quick hook. Doesn't help anything but show a player you're mad at him.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Knock off the ultra quick hook. Doesn't help anything but show a player you're mad at him.

I'll take that one a step farther. JB can keep his quick hook, but only if it is applied consistently and fairly across the team. If a player screws up, sit him down, but it can't just be the one player that gets pulled consistently, while allowing more favored players time on the floor even after a major mistake.

 

[Cowtown]

I'll take that one a step farther. JB can keep his quick hook, but only if it is applied consistently and fairly across the team. If a player screws up, sit him down, but it can't just be the one player that gets pulled consistently, while allowing more favored players time on the floor even after a major mistake.

I don't mind the quick hook for a developing player as long as it isn't followed by banishment to the fringes ad infinitum. If you need/trust a player enough to put him on the floor in the first place, he's got enough game for the job. If he makes a mistake and you pull him out, talk to him about it, and put him back in. Show him - and the entire gym - you have confidence in him. Otherwise, the quick hook is purely punitive and benefits neither the player nor the program.

 

[General20]

1. Play the bench more?

2. Switch defenses from time to time?

3. Press more?

None of the above?

All of the above?

One or two of the above, if so which ones?

Number one is silly. Ive never seen Boeheim bench a guy that's ready to play. Roberson, Patterson, and Johnson sat the bench because they were HUGE drop offs from the guys ahead of them. Towards the end when Grant got hurt and Roberson had to play he was an absolute disaster. You can say you want Syracuse to recruit better players, but that is just as silly as saying you want their players to make more shots, or win every game. Boeheim will always play everybody who can help the team.

No to number two. Boeheim has said numerous times that the team improved when they began playing one defense exclusively, and Syracuse's record over that time confirms Boeheim's statement.

Number three is a huge No. The guys who are best at pressing are usually small and quick. Physically they are almost exactly opposite as the guys who are best at playing zone. I'd rather see Syracuse recruit towards a single style and be the best at it, as they have, then try to force a square peg into a round hole.

So that is a big "none of the above" for me.

 

[OttoMets]

Number one is silly. Ive never seen Boeheim bench a guy that's ready to play. Roberson, Patterson, and Johnson sat the bench because they were HUGE drop offs from the guys ahead of them. Towards the end when Grant got hurt and Roberson had to play he was an absolute disaster. You can say you want Syracuse to recruit better players, but that is just as silly as saying you want their players to make more shots, or win every game. Boeheim will always play everybody who can help the team.

No to number two. Boeheim has said numerous times that the team improved when they began playing one defense exclusively, and Syracuse's record over that time confirms Boeheim's statement.

Number three is a huge No. The guys who are best at pressing are usually small and quick. Physically they are almost exactly opposite as the guys who are best at playing zone. I'd rather see Syracuse recruit towards a single style and be the best at it, as they have, then try to force a square peg into a round hole.

So that is a big "none of the above" for me.

Surprising take from a perceptive and sophisticated observer.

What did you find disastrous about Roberson's one start? And doesn't it stand to reason that that performance would have been stronger if he were already part of the regular rotation (rather than segregated from the offense and looking over his shoulder after each mistake)?

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Surprising take from a perceptive and sophisticated observer.

What did you find disastrous about Roberson's one start? And doesn't it stand to reason that that performance would have been stronger if he were already part of the regular rotation (rather than segregated from the offense and looking over his shoulder after each mistake)?

I had the same reaction. I found that out of character. I truly find it interesting that Baye was given a pass from contributing on the offensive end for 4 years and a rookie isn't given time to make a couple mistakes.

 

[General20]

Surprising take from a perceptive and sophisticated observer.

What did you find disastrous about Roberson's one start? And doesn't it stand to reason that that performance would have been stronger if he were already part of the regular rotation (rather than segregated from the offense and looking over his shoulder after each mistake)?

Roberson was in the wrong spot on defense on almost 100% of the possessions, and got routinely abused. Offensively he's a work in progress but I have no problem with him. Defensively, last year he was a complete disaster.

Would his performance have been stronger if he was part of the regular rotation? I think the answer is no, or at best, marginally better. You don't improve as a basketball player in games. You improve through hundreds of hours of practice and film study. If a year of practice and films study did not teach him how to play the zone, I see no logical reason why 10 extra minutes in a game would have made any difference.

 

[Briancuse]

Roberson was in the wrong spot on defense on almost 100% of the possessions, and got routinely abused. Offensively he's a work in progress but I have no problem with him. Defensively, last year he was a complete disaster.

Would his performance have been stronger if he was part of the regular rotation? I think the answer is no, or at best, marginally better. You don't improve as a basketball player in games. You improve through hundreds of hours of practice and film study. If a year of practice and films study did not teach him how to play the zone, I see no logical reason why 10 extra minutes in a game would have made any difference.

I don't either and it might have cost us a game or two during the season, Jb has a grasp on who is ready and who isn't. The same people who are complaining about the freshman not playing enough last year, would have been complaining if they did and it cost us some games.

 

[orangefan13]

It doesn't appear to me that JB recruits team lineups to press, play depth, or play m2m. Thats the key its not like lousiville who are going to press every year and recruit to. On the contrary we play a tough zone and if we are lucky any particular year can add extra things to our staples. I think our zone is almost always going to be pretty strong(especially to early feb), the key is getting a good offense around it.

imo he recruits to play a sit back zone and has been doing it for the last 15 years. I don't see him leaving the staple he has had for years, because this one team had offensive efficiency issues. If he plans on that he will let us know.
We usually
1.press for short periods almost only when behind,
2.play a deeper bench when they are ready and there isn't 6th and 7th men better on both sides of the ball then the 8th and 9th men. The competition was between gbinije roberson and buss for going 8 deep vs 7. Gbinije getting 15 mpg could have been moved up to 20-22 at both forward and guard if the coaches felt we needed that.
3. tweak the zone to its strengths and help mask its weakpoints year by year. For example with no on the ball defender and perimeter issues, our forwards played higher up alot this year similar to 2010-11 (Jacksons senior year). The 09-10, 11-12, and 12-13 teams were built differently with guys like dion, mcw and rautins up top, we didn't need to do that as much. Keita playing further up, a 7 foot shot blocking eraser like Fab, our freshmen centers not being fast enough to recover baseline, and strong rebounding on the wings are other examples.

I think JB just rolls the ball out with his prospects and sees what he has every year, our zone should be looked at as a different sit back defensive staple. As Syracuse fans we can overlook the blessing of that easily while not overlooking something like lousivilles/kentuckys full court press, or dukes tough on the ball D. If we had another two titles in the last 25 years we probably wouldn't overlook that as much.

I am in the strong opinion we lose games due to offense in the tournament 92% of the time compared to other teams that says something special about our defense. And that says even more considering the tempo issue and opponents hitting tough contested shots occasionally.

 

[Cowtown]

Roberson was in the wrong spot on defense on almost 100% of the possessions, and got routinely abused. Offensively he's a work in progress but I have no problem with him. Defensively, last year he was a complete disaster.

Would his performance have been stronger if he was part of the regular rotation? I think the answer is no, or at best, marginally better. You don't improve as a basketball player in games. You improve through hundreds of hours of practice and film study. If a year of practice and films study did not teach him how to play the zone, I see no logical reason why 10 extra minutes in a game would have made any difference.

Honestly, there is no substitute for actual game experience. The only way you find out whether a kid is ready is to put him in and let him play for more than a buck 45 every 4 games. I'm sorry G-20, but at the end of the day, he has the team he chose to have. And if players aren't ready when needed, he either a.) recruited players who haven't developed; b.) isn't developing his players according to his needs; or c.) winning games in the short term is more important than developing players in the long run. Perhaps it's a combination of all three, however weighted, but if after 2 years a player isn't ready to play more than mop-up, something's not right. Especially after several years of the same pattern with several players on several teams.

And as far as Roberson not knowing the defense, I call BS on that. Now to be fair, I don't get to see as many games as do most others here. But several years ago I picked up JB's video on how to play his 2-3, and all my HS teams - from Varsity boys to JV girls - picked it up within a few days. It runs on about 5 very basic keys, plus the traps. And I also switched out to some M2M about 30% of the time. Now, I'm pretty sure there's a little more going on at the SU men's level. But if 5'-0" girls in Western Canada can pick it up, while Div I men at SU can't, there's something else at work. Or rather, not working.

Just IMHO.