Our shot selection is terrible this year

[Cusefan0307]

According to this graphic.

 

[Cusefan0307]

 

[721Comstock]

It's odd about just how below average we are on the corner 3's, from both sides.

That's the easiest/shortest 3 - but we're turrible at them.

Not shocked to see Syracuse fall into the "good shooters, bad shots" quartile.
It's what we do. Repeatedly.

 

[MikeSU02]

It's odd about just how below average we are on the corner 3's, from both sides.

That's the easiest/shortest 3 - but we're turrible at them.

Not shocked to see Syracuse fall into the "good shooters, bad shots" quartile.
It's what we do. Repeatedly.

Just note this is charted on six games.

Also, I wish the SU-specific version had volume of shots and not just a color gradient to show above/below average.

We seem to be doing well around the rim and I'm guessing, without looking it up, that we are sneaking into the good shooters quadrant because of Q being the main reason.

Two other things I'd say:

1) The green on the arc of the three should be on both sides and I think it would if we would just play Kadary, Buddy and Joe (I know, I know, but I don't think Buddy is ever sitting and I know we'd get torched on his side of the wing). I can't help but think we can go five out to really allow for drive and kick. Heck, even if we had a center that could catch a lob or handle a pocket pass, we could really get some momentum.

2) That grey area in the pain is where we're see the Buddy back down and the Kadary half floater/half push shot. The Buddy back down really has to be tabled and Kadary needs to get his Kawhi studies done to make that shot.

 

[Alsacs]

According to this graphic.

This speaks to coaching.
Plain and simple.
If we have good shooters and are taking bad shots that should be up to the coaches to fix.

 

[Cusefan0307]

It's odd about just how below average we are on the corner 3's, from both sides.

That's the easiest/shortest 3 - but we're turrible at them.

Not shocked to see Syracuse fall into the "good shooters, bad shots" quartile.
It's what we do. Repeatedly.

The offensive design is terrible. So many other schools scheme open looks better than we do and it’s been this way for years.

 

[MikeSU02]

This speaks to coaching.
Plain and simple.
If we have good shooters and are taking bad shots that should be up to the coaches to fix.

I'll be honest, I think they are using the term "good" and "bad" shooters here too loosely and all-encompassing.

I'm not sure if I'd use the term if it were my chart.

To your point, I think the chart makes it seem like our players are the ones it's evaluating and I think our offense is just so uninventive that it's a lot on the coaches.

 

[Cusefan0307]

I'll be honest, I think they are using the term "good" and "bad" shooters here too loosely and all-encompassing.

I'm not sure if I'd use the term if it were my chart.

To your point, I think the chart makes it seem like our players are the ones it's evaluating and I think our offense is just so uninventive that it's a lot on the coaches.

Uninventive is a great word. We run the same “plays“ every year regardless of changes in personnel.

 

[Alsacs]

The offensive design is terrible. So many other schools scheme open looks better than we do and it’s been this way for years.

You mean the Buddy backdown fade away isn’t good offense?

We run a lot of ISO still.
Kadary is a freshman and isn’t perfect but the offense runs so much better when he is out there.

I wish we got Kadary playing with Joe a little more and running the offense.
It would help Joe.

 

[Alsacs]

If you watched a game from 2016 you wouldn’t really notice a difference offensively.

Same plays, same sets, same offense and defense.

JB said this year’s defense the guards play out more extended but it looks the same.

 

[GooseMutt]

I did not need a chart to know this

 

[Zelda Zonk]

I think this is what happens when:
• There are Steph Currys and Damian Lillards setting 'the example' in the NBA
• Our two 'guards' have reputations/egos as being 'great shooters' and are constantly trying to demonstrate/justify the reps
• Our two 'guards' can't get separation or make plays, so they end up relying on forced/too deep chucks
• The administration exercises little control over its two darlings, so they're basically in Donte Greene Mode, and the third 'shooter' follows the other two with his version of 'license'
• We have one player sometimes capable of post play, but he (Quincy) is still sometimes physically overmatched, and our 'center' is always physically overmatched
• We only have 8 plays, because our players are incapable of remembering more, so defenses know what we're going to to and force us into poor shots.

 

[Alsacs]

I think this is what happens when:
• There are Steph Currys and Damian Lillards setting 'the example' in the NBA
• Our two 'guards' have reputations/egos as being 'great shooters' and are constantly trying to demonstrate/justify the reps
• Our two 'guards' can't get separation or make plays, so they end up relying on forced/too deep chucks
• The administration exercises little control over its two darlings, so they're basically in Donte Greene Mode, and the third 'shooter' follows the other two with his version of 'license'
• We have one player sometimes capable of post play, but he (Quincy) is still sometimes physically overmatched, and our 'center' is always physically overmatched
• We only have 8 plays, because our players are incapable of remembering more, so defenses know what we're going to to and force us into poor shots.

If you read this verbatim on the air on Thursday during JB’s coaches show he might go Wayne Brady on Chapelle show on somebody.

 

[Cuse#1]

WE NEED A DAMN CENTER!!!! All those yrs we were a top team we had a very good to good center on both sides of the ball. If we had that we would be a very dangerous team IMO. but unfortunately we dont or at least wont see on the court.
1thing we have goin for us is we are a very balanced team, at least 4 in double figures

 

[Ghost]

According to this graphic.

That BC squad looks well coached and dangerous with good shooters and shots!

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Lol

 

[upperdeck]

show me the charts of when the shots were taken in the shot clock

 

[bigmike]

WE NEED A DAMN CENTER!!!! All those yrs we were a top team we had a very good to good center on both sides of the ball. If we had that we would be a very dangerous team IMO. but unfortunately we dont or at least wont see on the court.
1thing we have goin for us is we are a very balanced team, at least 4 in double figures

1000 likes

 

[Sherman20]

According to this graphic.

This confirms what I’ve been saying for a few years now. JB isn’t coaching good offense. We have decent shooters (even some really good ones!), but we don’t get them great shots. JB insists on running this horribly simple offense and refuses to run more creative or complex sets or change anything up, and the result is that we’re taking too many bad shots. The frustration is that we actually have experienced players who can absorb these concepts and JB is more than capable of designing a good offense, but his stubborn keep-it-simple philosophy makes us so predictable and holds us back. Give this offense to someone like Beilein and he could work wonders.

 

[jncuse]

Good shooters / bad shots is often simply a reflection of physical or certain skill based limitations (like ballhandling). Teams just don't have the horses to create enough easy looks for themselves. So it could be a recruiting issue

It is also sometimes a symptom of poor coaching schemes. Of course that would never be the case for Syracuse... but for some other coaches could be the cause.

For the sensitive folks out there they will just say its because Syracuse is missing their shots.

 

[CardiacCuse]

This is what I have been saying all season. Interesting to see it graphically.

Good shooters shooting bad shots does not equal a good shooting team, unfortunately.

I'd almost rather have a bad shooting team getting good shots than a "good shooting" team taking bad ones.

The frustrating part is that I do beleive this team is excellent at shooting the ball...when they have a good shot. Historically high FT% is not an accident. its just not translating into the offense.

Quality of shot comes down to scheme and approach. Very good teams like UVA can force this team into taking mostly bad shots because of lack of athleticism and telegraphed scheme that is easy to prepare for. Their defense is great at that one thing...which is why UVA destroys SU (not to mention their offense gets nothing but quality of shot vs the zone).

This one issue is the key problem with what JB has since the team got sanctions and in the ACC.

Other teams are getting quality shots and making them at a much higher % than normal bc of breakdowns in scheme (which is a lot to do with ahtleticism)...thats why we see all these players going for career night vs SU zone lately.

meanwhile, SU is often not getting quality looks or gunning or chucking...I think JB mostly says to players do exactly what I tell you on defense and you can do what you like on offense...which has worked when you have billy owens level talent...and an actual point gaurd running things.

Now, i think it is the case that players and team are getting results despite the scheme that team is running ...opponents (good ones anyways) are able to get ANYTHING they want on offense and limit the team considerably with their defense. FSU just whooped UVA - outrebounded them and got more steals and shot the 3 well...there is a recipe to beat them if you dont play completely into their hands.

i often watch the games this season and wonder how a pickup game with su players vs BC or bryant or pitt or UVA or whomever would look and I think the SU players would do better in the pickup game than the official one. I think they often have "better" players than the opponent but are getting boondoggled bc of scheme/approach and this graphic is why I am more sure of that now.

It comes down to being rigid and inflexible in terms of strategy and approach...never a good way to compete, imo.

 

[Sherman20]

The offensive design is terrible. So many other schools scheme open looks better than we do and it’s been this way for years.

It’s so incredibly frustrating. This is where a new coach could possibly help us. Though in a lot of other areas it could hurt if we make the wrong hire.

 

[CardiacCuse]

Another thing...this is why I hate the slow down offense kill the clock at the end of the game...the quality of shot the team gets when rushing the last few seconds of the clock to shoot suffers tremendously and teams almost always narrow the gap considerably...making comfortable wins into nailbiters unnecesarily.

 

[Sherman20]

This speaks to coaching.
Plain and simple.
If we have good shooters and are taking bad shots that should be up to the coaches to fix.

Buddy, Joe and Alan are all fundamentally good shooters. Quincy is a monster in the paint. Kadary can attack off the bounce. Marek is a damn Swiss Army knife. Coaches like Few, Painter, Beilein, Wright, and Bennett could get these guys better shots. We’re a fairly efficient offensive team but we should be a lot better considering the pieces we have.

 

[Sherman20]

This is what I have been saying all season. Interesting to see it graphically.

Good shooters shooting bad shots does not equal a good shooting team, unfortunately.

I'd almost rather have a bad shooting team getting good shots than a "good shooting" team taking bad ones.

The frustrating part is that I do beleive this team is excellent at shooting the ball...when they have a good shot. Historically high FT% is not an accident. its just not translating into the offense.

Quality of shot comes down to scheme and approach. Very good teams like UVA can force this team into taking mostly bad shots because of lack of athleticism and telegraphed scheme that is easy to prepare for. Their defense is great at that one thing...which is why UVA destroys SU (not to mention their offense gets nothing but quality of shot vs the zone).

This one issue is the key problem with what JB has since the team got sanctions and in the ACC.

Other teams are getting quality shots and making them at a much higher % than normal bc of breakdowns in scheme (which is a lot to do with ahtleticism)...thats why we see all these players going for career night vs SU zone lately.

meanwhile, SU is often not getting quality looks or gunning or chucking...I think JB mostly says to players do exactly what I tell you on defense and you can do what you like on offense...which has worked when you have billy owens level talent...and an actual point gaurd running things.

Now, i think it is the case that players and team are getting results despite the scheme that team is running ...opponents (good ones anyways) are able to get ANYTHING they want on offense and limit the team considerably with their defense. FSU just whooped UVA - outrebounded them and got more steals and shot the 3 well...there is a recipe to beat them if you dont play completely into their hands.

i often watch the games this season and wonder how a pickup game with su players vs BC or bryant or pitt or UVA or whomever would look and I think the SU players would do better in the pickup game than the official one. I think they often have "better" players than the opponent but are getting boondoggled bc of scheme/approach and this graphic is why I am more sure of that now.

It comes down to being rigid and inflexible in terms of strategy and approach...never a good way to compete, imo.

This!
“Historically high FT% is not an accident. its just not translating into the offense.”