offensive rating

[br801]

Yep it’s because people want to see something else and when it doesn’t meet the expectation they have set they decide it’s bad even when all the evidence proves it’s good.
The over reaction here is predictable. We won a hangover game Scoring efficiently on offense while not giving the effort needed on the glass and playing subpar defense.

Win every game convincingly and make it pretty. Is that too much to ask?

 

[pearl31]

Morehead would dispose of Cornell pretty easily, IMO. EW is terrible. UConn dropped 91 on Cornell, lol.

right and how many of those 91 were fast break? (which I've acknowledged we need more of)

 

[SoBeCuse]

OK, I just don't get pining for an offensive style that JB has really never used. And, yes, I do share your frustration in not running more off of rebounds/turnovers, but I don't consider that as part of the "offensive sets" discussion. With last night's game, I believe the beef should be w our piss-poor rebounding effort and our defensive efficiency (i.e. Morgan), and just overall lethargy

I mean reversing the ball crisply is something any team does besides us I guess? Lethargy was a big factor too, yes. I guess I’m clamoring for easier baskets. I don’t care how you do it. I just can’t understand the lack of pushing the tempo especially since it’s all the coaches and players talked about in the offeseason.

 

[pfister1]

Morehead would dispose of Cornell pretty easily, IMO. EW is terrible. UConn dropped 91 on Cornell, lol.

I'm not sure that what UConn scored against Cornell v. what we scored against Cornell is a valid comment on anything other than exactly that. Our defense forces teams to use a lot more of the shot clock meaning a slower pace, fewer possessions and less points scored. I mean Cornell had what, 6 shot clock violations? That's at least 6 possessions where they used the full 30 and how many others where they went deep and then we gave up an offensive board and started the process all over again. That is our defense, not our offense.

 

[SoBeCuse]

I'm not sure that what UConn scored against Cornell v. what we scored against Cornell is a valid comment on anything other than exactly that. Our defense forces teams to use a lot more of the shot clock meaning a slower pace, fewer possessions and less points scored. I mean Cornell had what, 6 shot clock violations? That's at least 6 possessions where they used the full 30 and how many others where they went deep and then we gave up an offensive board and started the process all over again. That is our defense, not our offense.

Good point. I thought about revising my comment. Defensive rebounding was definitely an issue.

 

[Sherman20]

I mean reversing the ball crisply is something any team does besides us I guess? Lethargy was a big factor too, yes. I guess I’m clamoring for easier baskets. I don’t care how you do it. I just can’t understand the lack of pushing the tempo especially since it’s all the coaches and players talked about in the offeseason.

they need to push the tempo, especially against these inferior teams. We need the team to get game experience running the fast break. We finally have depth this season, so I’m baffled by JB or the team’s unwillingness to get out on the break. Maybe they aren’t executing it well in practice, so JB doesn’t feel confident to push the tempo.

 

[Oakland]

Do you know that JB is one of those despairing? And he didn't mention tempo.

over the last 3 games (since frank's return), the cumulatave ortg is 116.5 (the number is not the same as just adding the 3 games and averaging since some games have more possessions and some - like last night - have fewer).

if su was at 116.5 for the season, they would be 11th in the nation in offensive efficiency, just a tick below uva.
the offense right now is efficient because it is scoring in the two most efficient ways - three pointers and free throws. believe it or not, syracuse is shooting 40% from three as a team over this stretch. shooting ~20 threes and hitting at 37% or better p while getting to the line ~20 times while hitting around 70%, all while playing at a slow pace limiting possessions is a pretty good formula for success.

those who despair about the offense are more concerned with tempo than with efficiency.

 

[pfister1]

they need to push the tempo, especially against these inferior teams. We need the team to get game experience running the fast break. We finally have depth this season, so I’m baffled by JB or the team’s unwillingness to get out on the break. Maybe they aren’t executing it well in practice, so JB doesn’t feel confident to push the tempo.

I don't know if there is a reluctance to get out on the break, as much as we give up the opportunity to do so as a result of the way we play defense. By definition the break occurs when you beat the other team's defense down the floor. We play zone and force a lot of long shots, including long misses. As a result we want our guards to stay at home on defense to rebound those long misses, not leak out on offense before the board has been secured. If we start to send the guards, I think you're going to see us giving up a lot more offensive rebounds on long rebounds, which would probably not be offset by the fast breaks we cash in.

Ultimately, you're not going to execute a lot of successful fast breaks where you aren't able to get your guys out in front of the defense.

 

[moqui]

Tony Bennett has tried this with very mixed results in March.

so has jb ... and his march record with it is pretty damn solid

 

[NineOneSeven]

over the last 3 games (since frank's return), the cumulatave ortg is 116.5 (the number is not the same as just adding the 3 games and averaging since some games have more possessions and some - like last night - have fewer).

if su was at 116.5 for the season, they would be 11th in the nation in offensive efficiency, just a tick below uva.
the offense right now is efficient because it is scoring in the two most efficient ways - three pointers and free throws. believe it or not, syracuse is shooting 40% from three as a team over this stretch. shooting ~20 threes and hitting at 37% or better p while getting to the line ~20 times while hitting around 70%, all while playing at a slow pace limiting possessions is a pretty good formula for success.

those who despair about the offense are more concerned with tempo than with efficiency.

Which is why I said the box score last night was so strange. We are a poor man's virginia, at least for a lot of the regular season it seems.

 

[moqui]

Do you know that JB is one of those despairing? And he didn't mention tempo.

despairing is too strong a word, but we're all disappointed. dropping from 1.17 v colgate to 1.11 v cornell is not good. but the sky isn't falling. indeed, the overall trend line is positive.

imho.

 

[Zelda Zonk]

syracuse points scored per possession, game by game
ewu 0.97
morehead st. 1.09
uconn 1.00
oregon 0.93
colgate 1.17
ohio st. 1.16
cornell 1.11

draw your own conclusions

Interesting, maybe, but how can you draw a conclusion from that? Small sample size. You can attribute 'improvement' to simple 'progress and familiarity,' or to Tyus beginning to trust his 'new shot,' or Oshae recognizing his early season 'wrongful mindset,' or just fluctuations in the quality of opponent play. Both Oregon and UConn defended us far better than the last three teams, and that had nothing to do with frank being with us. It's a good thing we're probably trending upward, but not being able to put a lot of distance between us and Cornell isn't comforting.

 

[General20]

syracuse points scored per possession, game by game
ewu 0.97
morehead st. 1.09
uconn 1.00
oregon 0.93
colgate 1.17
ohio st. 1.16
cornell 1.11

draw your own conclusions

I think because Syracuse was a bad offensive team last year, that people who don't really watch the games closely or can't tell what is going on are jumping to the conclusion that Syracuse's offense is bad again this year. That really wasn't the case against Cornell, and hasn't been the case in the last 3 games.

Syracuse shot 50% from the floor and 38% from 3, which is excellent offensive efficiency, and that includes Howard (who is clearly not totally healthy and a bit of a mess right now) going 1 for 7. Take away his 1 for 7 and Syracuse shot 57% from the field and 50% from 3 which is about as good as any team is ever going to shoot.

The only reason Syracuse's efficiency against Cornell was lower than it was against Ohio St or Colgate is because they shot really poorly from the free throw line, only going 13-21, including I think 4 or 5 misses on the front end of 1 and 1's. They were a very good free throw shooting team last year and have been again this year, so I think we can consider this an anomaly. If they hit free throws like they usually do, they beat Cornell by 20 and their offensive efficiency is the best of the season so far.

The reason Boeheim was so upset had little to do with offense. The defense played terribly. Especially Chukwu, Sidibe, and Carey.

For those who want a quick and easy way to tell when the Syracuse players are executing Boeheim's strategy to perfection and when they screw up, look at where the opposing team's points are coming from. When some nobody from the bench goes off against us, our players are doing what Boeheim wants them to. When the opposing team's best player has a good game, something has gone wrong (unless he's hitting difficult shots that are not in his wheel house).

Cornell is pretty much a one man team. We knew we had to stop Matt Morgan, and he scored 26 points on 64% shooting and 60% from 3. That is clear proof that SU's guys were not doing what they were suppose to do.

 

[moqui]

yeah, im concerned with tempo. I like to watch basketball as a recreational endeavor...not watch games that look like dudes from cocoon dragging their asses up and down the court.

oh, i agree. several of us were lamenting this general cbb trend in the chukwu thread late last week

 

[moqui]

Against Cornell.

fair enough . . . but certainly colgate and arguably cornell are better than both ewu & morehead. they are not measuring sticks for acc competition, but comparing like-to-like certainly shows improvement

 

[moqui]

Interesting, maybe, but how can you draw a conclusion from that? Small sample size. You can attribute 'improvement' to simple 'progress and familiarity,' or to Tyus beginning to trust his 'new shot,' or Oshae recognizing his early season 'wrongful mindset,' or just fluctuations in the quality of opponent play. Both Oregon and UConn defended us far better than the last three teams, and that had nothing to do with frank being with us. It's a good thing we're probably trending upward, but not being able to put a lot of distance between us and Cornell isn't comforting.

my take is that it's not just frank; the november games have essentially been our pre-season, played for real. we had zero point guards with which to practice. jb & staff never really got to work on the offense & have had to work it out under fire in real games. on the offensive side of the ball, every team in the nation had a 6 week head start on syracuse.

i've been saying for weeks that i won't be willing to make a judgement on this team until december because of that.

 

[cuseattle]

over the last 3 games (since frank's return), the cumulatave ortg is 116.5 (the number is not the same as just adding the 3 games and averaging since some games have more possessions and some - like last night - have fewer).

if su was at 116.5 for the season, they would be 11th in the nation in offensive efficiency, just a tick below uva.
the offense right now is efficient because it is scoring in the two most efficient ways - three pointers and free throws. believe it or not, syracuse is shooting 40% from three as a team over this stretch. shooting ~20 threes and hitting at 37% or better p while getting to the line ~20 times while hitting around 70%, all while playing at a slow pace limiting possessions is a pretty good formula for success.

those who despair about the offense are more concerned with tempo than with efficiency.

You, sir, are awesome.

 

[upperdeck]

what the team has been unable to get is the TOs at the top of the zone which lead to some easy baskets. Teams that score, more get those 4-5 and we get 1-2.. when you play slow, the other teams play slow and you also dont get easy baskets the game will always be a struggle to grow the lead.

 

[SoBeCuse]

Get ready for some more despair on Tuesday night... Northeastern ranks in the 300s in Adjusted Tempo and Average Possession Length (both offensively and defensively). Expect another slow game that likely won’t be exciting enough for many, regardless of the outcome.

I admit I haven’t dived into Northeastern’s numbers but I looked at their schedule. Lately they are scoring. Over 90 against Bucknell. 81 against EMU which should be a slower pace because of EMU’s Zone. Doesn’t suggest they are grinding out possessions lately. Should be interesting to see.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Northeastern is 313th in Tempo. They are also not very good defensively. 179.

 

[Cusefan0307]

fair enough . . . but certainly colgate and arguably cornell are better than both ewu & morehead. they are not measuring sticks for acc competition, but comparing like-to-like certainly shows improvement

Yeah we were actually more efficient this year against Cornell than last year. The defense was worse and possessions were much lower.

 

[OttoMets]

...However, as much as many would argue, the way we play is conducive to March when every game slows down and possessions are critical.

Cuse

Very good point. I think Boeheim would mostly agree with that.

Sure is brutal to watch, though. Very different from how Syracuse played basketball from 1976 (from what they tell me) to 2012.

 

[Sherman20]

I think because Syracuse was a bad offensive team last year, that people who don't really watch the games closely or can't tell what is going on are jumping to the conclusion that Syracuse's offense is bad again this year. That really wasn't the case against Cornell, and hasn't been the case in the last 3 games.

Syracuse shot 50% from the floor and 38% from 3, which is excellent offensive efficiency, and that includes Howard (who is clearly not totally healthy and a bit of a mess right now) going 1 for 7. Take away his 1 for 7 and Syracuse shot 57% from the field and 50% from 3 which is about as good as any team is ever going to shoot.

The only reason Syracuse's efficiency against Cornell was lower than it was against Ohio St or Colgate is because they shot really poorly from the free throw line, only going 13-21, including I think 4 or 5 misses on the front end of 1 and 1's. They were a very good free throw shooting team last year and have been again this year, so I think we can consider this an anomaly. If they hit free throws like they usually do, they beat Cornell by 20 and their offensive efficiency is the best of the season so far.

The reason Boeheim was so upset had little to do with offense. The defense played terribly. Especially Chukwu, Sidibe, and Carey.

For those who want a quick and easy way to tell when the Syracuse players are executing Boeheim's strategy to perfection and when they screw up, look at where the opposing team's points are coming from. When some nobody from the bench goes off against us, our players are doing what Boeheim wants them to. When the opposing team's best player has a good game, something has gone wrong (unless he's hitting difficult shots that are not in his wheel house).

Cornell is pretty much a one man team. We knew we had to stop Matt Morgan, and he scored 26 points on 64% shooting and 60% from 3. That is clear proof that SU's guys were not doing what they were suppose to do.

This post is one of the better post-game analyses of the Cornell game I’ve seen. Not surprising coming from The General.

 

[moqui]

update:
ewu 0.97
morehead st. 1.09
uconn 1.00
oregon 0.93
colgate 1.17
ohio st. 1.16
cornell 1.11
northeastern 1.20

and the cumulative figures

first four: 1.06
next four: 1.18

fwiw, 1.18 for the season would put us top 5 in the nation

 

[Cuseball]

update:
ewu 0.97
morehead st. 1.09
uconn 1.00
oregon 0.93
colgate 1.17
ohio st. 1.16
cornell 1.11
northeastern 1.20

and the cumulative figures

first four: 1.06
next four: 1.18

fwiw, 1.18 for the season would put us top 5 in the nation

Great info and very, very promising trend. Next step is to get Frank performing better and a bit more from Sidibe.

Cuse!