Patterson and McCullough

[albanycuse]

All this "disappointment" because we took patterson and we didnt wait for jordan, did you guys ever think this could of been a package deal and they wanted to play together? Im sure the staff knew taking patterson that mccullough would soon follow.

 

[PhatOrange]

All this "disappointment" because we took patterson and we didnt wait for jordan, did you guys ever think this could of been a package deal and they wanted to play together? Im sure the staff knew taking patterson that mccullough would soon follow.

Patterson ain't no slouch either. It's rare that Syracuse actually recruits a guard who has a smooth looking jump shot.

 

[El Jefe Syr]

All this "disappointment" because we took patterson and we didnt wait for jordan, did you guys ever think this could of been a package deal and they wanted to play together? Im sure the staff knew taking patterson that mccullough would soon follow.

agreed, I love the strategy. It seems the unless you're UK/Cal, the best way to sustain success is to take some high-mid level talent who will actually stay and develop for 4 years along with 1 or 2 the top-of-class studs. The key is identifying which high-mid guys will actually develop - the staff seems to have a great track record in doing this.

 

[Whitey23]

I doubt it. They've only know each other for 2 months and haven't even played in a game together.

 

[Rocco]

Not going to lie, I like the fact that we are getting kids that aren't in the top 40 or so. I really don't like to see all of the turnover. If you come to a school for a free ride and ball, stay the 4 years (obvious exceptions can be made). It would make college bball so much more fun to watch for the fans.

 

[albanycuse]

I doubt it. They've only know each other for 2 months and haven't even played in a game together.

How do you know how long they've known eachother?

 

[Whitey23]

How do you know how long they've known eachother?

Just guessing from the fact that Patterson is from Indiana and McCullough is from the Bronx. I guess they could have crossed paths at an AAU tournament or something but they wouldn't have been teammates.

 

[pfister1]

Just guessing from the fact that Patterson is from Indiana and McCullough is from the Bronx. I guess they could have crossed paths at an AAU tournament or something but they wouldn't have been teammates.

That may be true, but I'm pretty sure we offered BJ Johnson because he is going to be part of a package with his brother Dakari Johnson.

 

[orangejunkie]

Those two guys have been at the prep school for 3 months. Plenty of time to form a bond and possibly influence McCullough's decision. I think he was probably already leaning toward SU and the Patterson connection sealed the deal. Didn't hurt that Hopkins has been up there 6 times. Also, McCullough is a NYC kid which also helps.

 

[albanycuse]

Just guessing from the fact that Patterson is from Indiana and McCullough is from the Bronx. I guess they could have crossed paths at an AAU tournament or something but they wouldn't have been teammates.

Where theyre from means nothing, i bet theyve played at the same tournaments or attended the same camps.

 

[Feelingmelo]

Don't underestimate a coach's influence. You have to see that Bryant and Mccullough are the true prizes. Giving the scholarships to their senior teammates goes a long way w the coach.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

 

[Digable5]

All this "disappointment" because we took patterson and we didnt wait for jordan, did you guys ever think this could of been a package deal and they wanted to play together? Im sure the staff knew taking patterson that mccullough would soon follow.

How about we just assume the kid has talent and deserves the scholarship to Syracuse on his own merits?

 

[albanycuse]

How about we just assume the kid has talent and deserves the scholarship to Syracuse on his own merits?

He def does but it no doubt helped us reel in mccullough ala flynn/harris and scoop/jackson

 

[OrlandoCuse]

I prefer to think that we took McCullough to get Whitehead.

 

[dollarbill44]

Not going to lie, I like the fact that we are getting kids that aren't in the top 40 or so. I really don't like to see all of the turnover. If you come to a school for a free ride and ball, stay the 4 years (obvious exceptions can be made). It would make college bball so much more fun to watch for the fans.

True. Like the old days. Rivalries meant more because the players were immersed in them for 4 years and developed personal rivalries within the team rivalries (Pearl vs Ewing/Mullin/Berry etc...).

 

[cuseinseattle]

Patterson ain't no slouch either. It's rare that Syracuse actually recruits a guard who has a smooth looking jump shot.

Once you get outside the top 10-15 kids its a crap shoot who is rated 19 or 20 or 40. Many of this recruiting services don't know what they are talking about. People said Syracuse was taking Johnny Flynn only because he went to the same school as Paul Harris and they wanted Paul and it was a packaged deal. Boeheim's response was something like Flynn is one of the best point guards out there and we really like him. He ended up being an ok college player I think. I think you have to trust your assistants and head coach in player evalation and not look at one kid is ranked 26 and another is ranked 45.

 

[reedny]

Don't underestimate a coach's influence. You have to see that Bryant and Mccullough are the true prizes. Giving the scholarships to their senior teammates goes a long way w the coach.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

And also gets us some great program kids that can develop and help us along the way. Chino is a nice get ... and by some accounts, is already better than Keita. He's 6'10 with an 85 average in school, and chaffes at how disrespectful young people are towards their elders. Hard not to like a kid like that, whether we get Bryant or not.

 

[RF2044]

All this "disappointment" because we took patterson and we didnt wait for jordan, did you guys ever think this could of been a package deal and they wanted to play together? Im sure the staff knew taking patterson that mccullough would soon follow.

Just out of curiosity, who were all of these posters expressing "disappointment" because we took Patterson?

 

[albanycuse]

Just out of curiosity, who were all of these posters expressing "disappointment" because we took Patterson?

The ones who said we settled for him over jordan.

 

[RF2044]

The ones who said we settled for him over jordan.

I don't recall seeing anyone express that we "settled." I do recall seeing people point out that with Gbinje / Cooney on the roster, that PG might be a bigger area of team need [i.e., Jordan] than adding another SG--especially if MCW bolts to go pro.

 

[albanycuse]

I don't recall seeing anyone express that we "settled." I do recall seeing people point out that with Gbinje / Cooney on the roster, that PG might be a bigger area of team need [i.e., Jordan] than adding another SG--especially if MCW bolts to go pro.

Well you must of missed it because its here.

 

[newmexicuse]

I prefer to think we took McCullough to get McCullough.

I prefer to think that we took McCullough to get Whitehead.

 

[RF2044]

Well you must of missed it because its here.

Okay--feel free to point to posters who said it that way. What I saw from most posters was excitement over Patterson. I didn't see any "disappointment" [from your original post]. I didn't see anyone make the claim that we "settled." What I did see was some people concerned about our backcourt depth this year and down the road, and expressing a preference that we land Jordan to help rectify that depth constraint at PG.

This all feels pretty straw man to me.

 

[albanycuse]

Okay--feel free to point to posters who said it that way. What I saw from most posters was excitement over Patterson.

This all feels pretty straw man to me.

Why would i point them out when you can easily find it. I see youre trying to make something out of nothing.

 

[RF2044]

Why would i point them out when you can easily find it. I see youre trying to make something out of nothing.

Isn't that exactly what you did by making this thread in the first place? Making something out of nothing? Again, point to one poster who expressed "disappointment" or claimed that we "settled" for Patterson--just one.

You probably won't be able to find one, because it is doubtful that anyone did. They may have expressed a preference [per my post above] for Jordan, given our PG depth. That is a different thing than claiming that we "settled" for Patterson.