Class of 2022 PG Quadir Copeland (PA/IMG) COMMITTED/SIGNED TO SYRACUSE

[DoctorBombay]

Triche was veryyyyy underrated also

Senior year Andy Rautins was a beast at the top of the zone. Kadary was definitely top 5 though.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

Ummm, if Eddie Moss isn’t leading the discussion, it’s not worth having.

 

[alphaorange]

Getting steals at the top of the zone is not indicative of being a good on the ball defender. They simply are not the same thing. AI was great at getting steals but nobody would ever say he was a good on the ball defender. It would be different if all the steals cam from picking the ball handlers pocket instead of anticipating passes from other players and intercepting them. Both are great players but indicate different abilities. I always pictured a great on the ball defender as a guy that could just harass a ball handler into either a mistake or just giving the ball up, not even mentioning limiting the ability to get a shot off. Some guys, like MCW, can be both.

 

[General20]

I think a helpful oversimplification when judging how guards defend in the zone, is to divide them into 4 categories.

1) Guys who play good positional D and who also create a lot of turnovers.
2) Plays good positional D but doesnt create many turnovers.
3) Doesn't play good positional D, but makes up for it by creating a lot of turnovers.
4) Doesn't play good positional D or force many turnovers.

The fourth group is usually the domain of freshemn and most freshmen fall into it.

I think of GMac as the best example of group three. He was undersized and was never going to be a blanket defender, but he understood the zone really well, knew when he should take chances on going for a steal and got a lot of them. Enough to be a nusciance that offenses needed to worry about.

Triche is the perfect group 2 example. He understood the zone from day 1. Was tall and strong and always in the right place, but didn't steal the ball often.

For group 1 Ill give you my defensive Mount Rushmore (for the zone) ... Heart, Rautins, MCW, Gbinije.

I would put Richmond in group 3 (though the elite side of group 3). He got tons of steals, but didn't understand the rotations well and gave up a ton of open shots. There are, of course really good reasons for this. His team had no preseason and only about half the regular season practice time that a normal team gets. And at the end of the year when he should have been figuring everything out, instead he was hobbled by a knee injury. I have little doubt he would have jumped up to group 1 had he stayed. But just judging from productivity and not potential, Richmond doesn't touch the top 10 defensive SU guards.

 

[721Comstock]

I think a helpful oversimplification when judging how guards defend in the zone, is to divide them into 4 categories.

1) Guys who play good positional D and who also create a lot of turnovers.
2) Plays good positional D but doesnt create many turnovers.
3) Doesn't play good positional D, but makes up for it by creating a lot of turnovers.
4) Doesn't play good positional D or force many turnovers.

The fourth group is usually the domain of freshemn and most freshmen fall into it.

I think of GMac as the best example of group three. He was undersized and was never going to be a blanket defender, but he understood the zone really well, knew when he should take chances on going for a steal and got a lot of them. Enough to be a nusciance that offenses needed to worry about.

Triche is the perfect group 2 example. He understood the zone from day 1. Was tall and strong and always in the right place, but didn't steal the ball often.

For group 1 Ill give you my defensive Mount Rushmore (for the zone) ... Heart, Rautins, MCW, Gbinije.

I would put Richmond in group 3 (though the elite side of group 3). He got tons of steals, but didn't understand the rotations well and gave up a ton of open shots. There are, of course really good reasons for this. His team had no preseason and only about half the regular season practice time that a normal team gets. And at the end of the year when he should have been figuring everything out, instead he was hobbled by a knee injury. I have little doubt he would have jumped up to group 1 had he stayed. But just judging from productivity and not potential, Richmond doesn't touch the top 10 defensive SU guards.

It’s funny - as soon as I saw your Four Quadrants ranking system, my very first thoughts were:
RoboTriche is the poster boy Q2.
GMac ditto for the Q3.

Triche was an artisan master craftsman zone defender.
You could see it in how he shaded and hedged, he never went under a screen, and was more than physical enough to never get moved out of position.
Textbook.
But - he didn’t get a ton of steals.

GMac was never gonna be a plus defender, but he was brilliant at knowing when to gamble for a steal.

Guys like Dion & Cooney were also good at this - baiting the offensive player into thinking an ‘easy’ pass was there, then lunging for the steal, and taking it the other way for a thunder dunk.

 

[General20]

It’s funny - as soon as I saw your Four Quadrants ranking system, my very first thoughts were:
RoboTriche is the poster boy Q2.
GMac ditto for the Q3.

Triche was an artisan master craftsman zone defender.
You could see it in how he shaded and hedged, he never went under a screen, and was more than physical enough to never get moved out of position.
Textbook.
But - he didn’t get a ton of steals.

GMac was never gonna be a plus defender, but he was brilliant at knowing when to gamble for a steal.

Guys like Dion & Cooney were also good at this - baiting the offensive player into thinking an ‘easy’ pass was there, then lunging for the steal, and taking it the other way for a thunder dunk.

It's a fun exercise, I do it with all our players. Not everybody fits neatly into a group (Richmond is one of those guys, and Flynn is too) but I think it's a helpful though imperfect thought experiment.

I'd put Dion and Cooney both into tier 1. There might be room for a tier 1 that has guys like Cooney, Dion Jardine and then an extra level above that for the Mount Rushmore guys. If you do that Howard is kind of a borderline tier 1/Mount Rushmore guy.

I like Sims, Battle, Duany as tier 2 guys.

Flynn is interesting because he got lots of steals but mostly from pressing. He was a tier 1 guy when we pressed and a tier 4 guy when we played zone.

 

[SUFaninNJ]

It's a fun exercise, I do it with all our players. Not everybody fits neatly into a group (Richmond is one of those guys, and Flynn is too) but I think it's a helpful though imperfect thought experiment.

I'd put Dion and Cooney both into tier 1. There might be room for a tier 1 that has guys like Cooney, Dion Jardine and then an extra level above that for the Mount Rushmore guys. If you do that Howard is kind of a borderline tier 1/Mount Rushmore guy.

I like Sims, Battle, Duany as tier 2 guys.

Flynn is interesting because he got lots of steals but mostly from pressing. He was a tier 1 guy when we pressed and a tier 4 guy when we played zone.

So is this a post 1995 Mount Rushmore?

 

[General20]

So is this a post 1995 Mount Rushmore?

Yes. Too hard to compare say, Stevie Thompson with Mike Gbinije. They were both elite defenders who played both forward and guard but game was so different and their responsibilities were so different that the comparisons kind of stop there.

 

[orange79]

Quadir Copeland, please.

 

[rrlbees]

Quadir Copeland, please.

what tier will he be?

 

[jordoo]

I think a helpful oversimplification when judging how guards defend in the zone, is to divide them into 4 categories.

1) Guys who play good positional D and who also create a lot of turnovers.
2) Plays good positional D but doesnt create many turnovers.
3) Doesn't play good positional D, but makes up for it by creating a lot of turnovers.
4) Doesn't play good positional D or force many turnovers.

The fourth group is usually the domain of freshemn and most freshmen fall into it.

I think of GMac as the best example of group three. He was undersized and was never going to be a blanket defender, but he understood the zone really well, knew when he should take chances on going for a steal and got a lot of them. Enough to be a nusciance that offenses needed to worry about.

Triche is the perfect group 2 example. He understood the zone from day 1. Was tall and strong and always in the right place, but didn't steal the ball often.

For group 1 Ill give you my defensive Mount Rushmore (for the zone) ... Heart, Rautins, MCW, Gbinije.

I would put Richmond in group 3 (though the elite side of group 3). He got tons of steals, but didn't understand the rotations well and gave up a ton of open shots. There are, of course really good reasons for this. His team had no preseason and only about half the regular season practice time that a normal team gets. And at the end of the year when he should have been figuring everything out, instead he was hobbled by a knee injury. I have little doubt he would have jumped up to group 1 had he stayed. But just judging from productivity and not potential, Richmond doesn't touch the top 10 defensive SU guards.

Having a great #2 category guy like Triche will make a #3 category guy look even better IMO. Triche was probably the most fundamentally sound guard at the top we’ve ever had. It wasn’t just his positioning but he was very stout stopping penetration because of his strong frame, he was excellent at seeing and avoiding getting screened and he was able to rebound even against big bodies. We all know he was a great defender but I think as a whole his defense is still under valued by many.

it’s no coincidence that all the guys who played alongside Triche were great or good. His defense was so reliable that it upgraded those next to him.

I’m sure you know all this though.

 

[orange79]

what tier will he be?

If he picks SU - 5 (#1 draft pick!)

If not, well...

 

[Niastri]

what tier will he be?

He has the physical tools to be a tier 1... Quick feet, long arms, room to get strong enough to do Triche like fighting through screens.

We have no idea about the mental side, though. However, his vision while passing bodes well for his effectiveness in the zone. The two skills are at least related, involving anticipation and understanding of where everything is going.

 

[baggerbob]

Ummm, if Eddie Moss isn’t leading the discussion, it’s not worth having.

No one has come along since to even be in the same conversation. He was the only lock down defender at guard we have had.

 

[longtimefan]

Speak for yourself

I always do.

 

[ORANGE OATH]

Fast Eddie Moss, I remember him well !
What a guard, watched him make plenty of breakaway snowbirds !

 

[007]

No one has come along since to even be in the same conversation. He was the only lock down defender at guard we have had.

Jason Hart would definitely be "in the same conversation"

 

[721Comstock]

Jason Hart would definitely be "in the same conversation"

One of these guys played for nearly a decade in the Association, primarily due to his D ability.

Even if he wasn’t “fast”.

 

[pearl31]

oh wait ok this thread is just for naming former players

 

[OttoinGrotto]

oh wait ok this thread is just for naming former players

You know who Quadir's game doesn't remind me of at all?

Bobby Lazor

 

[SUOrangeSU]

Getting steals at the top of the zone is not indicative of being a good on the ball defender. They simply are not the same thing. AI was great at getting steals but nobody would ever say he was a good on the ball defender. It would be different if all the steals cam from picking the ball handlers pocket instead of anticipating passes from other players and intercepting them. Both are great players but indicate different abilities. I always pictured a great on the ball defender as a guy that could just harass a ball handler into either a mistake or just giving the ball up, not even mentioning limiting the ability to get a shot off. Some guys, like MCW, can be both.

Bingo. I hate hate hate when people try to imply that getting steals and blocks automatically means you are good defensively. I truly think they have never played competitive basketball. Bruce Bowen hardly ever got steals but was damn near the best on ball defender I’ve ever seen (slightly dirty but...) and you have Javale McGee in seasons putting up elite blocks but is legit one of the worst defenders I’ve ever watched.

 

[Funk Doc]

Bingo. I hate hate hate when people try to imply that getting steals and blocks automatically means you are good defensively. I truly think they have never played competitive basketball. Bruce Bowen hardly ever got steals but was damn near the best on ball defender I’ve ever seen (slightly dirty but...) and you have Javale McGee in seasons putting up elite blocks but is legit one of the worst defenders I’ve ever watched.

Good call on Bowen...I would also put Ron Artest(or whatever he calls himself now) right there with him.

 

[Cusesky8214]

*music nsfw*

 

[721Comstock]

Love this kid’s swag.

Would be thrilled if he’s the PG we end up landing.

 

[rrlbees]