Quadir Copeland

[Red Holzman]

Play Copeland.
I'd rather see freshmen that bring lots of energy and sometimes try to do too much -but also learning/growing from their mistakes, vs freshmen playing with questionable energy and/or scared of being sat back down.
W's and L's don't matter now IMO -hard to imagine making the tournament-
Therefore give minutes and experience to the players who are bringing it with the goal of developing a solid team for next season.

 

[swish7]

I thought he was tremendous tonight -- his energy was one the keys to the big comeback. Also hit a bunch of shots earlier, and then the huge 4-point play. 10 points on 4-5 shooting, 5 rebs, 2 blocks, 1 steal (all in just 13 min).

I have been hoping the kid would find a spot all season. I love his positive energy and cheering from the bench. He seems like a good teammate, and a competitor.

A bit erratic on the court, but that could also be his playing style.

I hope JB starts rewarding PT to the effort guys, instead of waiting for the existing starters to start giving effort.

I think JB has been doing a good job mixing and mingling players while searching for what works.

 

[Newhouser]

I would give Q the minutes going to Symir.

 

[hoopsupstate]

Benny is who he is. Great kid and athletic as hell, but has poor basketball skills. He can’t get to the basket at all. Horrible footwork. Brown makes it look easy cutting and dribbling to the basket. Benny just hangs out waiting for the ball to come to him. Brown is always ready and anticipating where the ball is going. He has great instincts, Benny has none. You can probably say the same thing about Copeland.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Great to see Copeland have a big game and show what kind of impact he can have on a game. I hope he keeps getting minutes.

 

[Day2]

You just linked your previous comment. That isn’t supporting your argument with reasoning.

- Did it stunt his growth?
You seem to be of the opinion that ‘this’ (game?) proved your point. It doesn’t. The fact is, you don’t know what growth there would be unless you could play out two timelines. That’s the arrogance of your declaration of a ‘right’/’wrong’ decision. In your mind, the result you see is the best result that there could have been and that’s daft. Secondarily, you actually double down and assert a decision had no effect whatsoever. Which is bizarre, but, okay. To have that make sense and still work out in your favor you then have to also double down on your precognition, where keeping him in the last game would have necessarily resulted in more of the same turnovers and not the ‘good play’ we saw tonight.

“It’s as if there’s…” no way for you to imagine anything other than what you are presented with…. Which, I guess, makes it easy to argue for, since it doesn’t tax the mind much.

You’ve also erected straw men, but that’s what you get when you need to be belligerent about a concept, without having an understanding of it. No one said QC needed to be cowering in the corner I order for there to have been an effect. Not sure how you even get to that, except if you need to oversimplify psychology. Whatevs. “Trauma” was never part of it. This just reinforces that you didn‘t understand the idea(s).

That‘s about all I can say, to someone who believes there can actually be an empirically correct right Or wrong decision in this context. The truth is, there are only opinions, some with more and some with less reasoning, and then there’s the result of one of those decisions.

That’s an astounding amount of projection. Astounding.

And no, I didn’t link to my previous comment, I linked to your comment where you conceded the point. Yes, a point so illogical, you agreed with it. That’s all the reasoning I need, pal.

 

[swish7]

I would give Q the minutes going to Symir.

Symir is another effort guy. I wouldn't reduce his already paltry minutes.

 

[Ozone!]

Love how he is emerging, growing and showing up big in last night’s game.
A difference maker!!!

 

[OrangeDW]

He got in the last game, threw a horrendous pass and that indicated he was also going to throw the subsequent five passes out of bounds, as well. Apparently, getting benched for one error makes you exponentially better, but only after 48 hours.

Every game is different.

Protecting a lead late in the game vs. trying to comeback from down 20 lead to two very different approaches.

Copeland seems to be a better fit for the latter at this point based on the limited time we’ve seen him.

 

[newmexicuse]

Had a party last night, so I did not get to watch the game until this AM....from tape. The DVR stopped recording with about a minute left, so I did not see the very end, which sucked........my own fault - have to extend game recordings by 60 minutes instead of 30 minutes.

Anyways, all that being said, I was surprised to not see a Copeland thread on the forum this AM, so I will start one now.

I thought QC played with tremendous energy and hustle. His 4 point play was absolutely critical in our comeback run. The kid ended up with 10 and 5 and 2 blocks, plus several huge hustle plays that did not show up in the box.

The question now to be asked - is he really this good or was this an anomaly effort similar to Justin's 25 point game ?

Regardless, Q brings excitement, something this team needs.

If Q is really this good and got 25 minutes a game he would get this team to another level.

If his level is sustainable our best forward combo becomes Brown and Q.

EDIT - Dumb me, did not scroll down far enough to find the thread - LOL !!!! Thank you moderators for fixing this !!! That gives me two dumbs on one game, the first being not recording long enough !!!

I will self award myself the dumb poster of the day award.

 

[Orangezoo]

Quadir Copeland

I thought he was tremendous tonight -- his energy was one the keys to the big comeback. Also hit a bunch of shots earlier, and then the huge 4-point play. 10 points on 4-5 shooting, 5 rebs, 2 blocks, 1 steal (all in just 13 min).

syracusefan.com

 

[Zelda Zonk]

That’s an astounding amount of projection. Astounding.

And no, I didn’t link to my previous comment, I linked to your comment where you conceded the point. Yes, a point so illogical, you agreed with it. That’s all the reasoning I need, pal.

The “projecting” began with the assumption that leaving him in would result in additional turnovers.

You said taking him out “prevents him from making more turnovers.”
I agreed that that was true. The simplest possible truth—you take any player out of the lineup, and they cannot make a turnover. Yes, agreed. And that you think that actually has any actual meaning in this discussion truly represents that you aren’t understanding the discussion.

But, again, whatever. On the level of your argument, yes, it is true—I concede that point. JB eliminated the possibility of another QC turnover. Brilliant!

 

[Zelda Zonk]

Every game is different.

Protecting a lead late in the game vs. trying to comeback from down 20 lead to two very different approaches.

Copeland seems to be a better fit for the latter at this point based on the limited time we’ve seen him.

Agreed. Although I wasn’t reacting to just that one benching. And, JB determined that he wanted QC in that previous game, with a lead, and then quickly determined he was wrong in wanting that… because… reasons. So, I guess he was wrong before he was right? If he left him in and QC didn’t make another mistake, what then? Comes down to how you trust a player will react to a mistake and if they can learn from it on the court. I would like to believe that a player we recruited as a playmaking ‘guard’ is intelligent enough to self-correct a glaring mistake on the fly. Some of our Players get that opportunity, some of the time….

 

[Trueblue25]

Copeland shows you more in 5 minutes than Bell’s shown in 10+ games.

Benny’s effort and focus is inconsistent at best.

I want to win games, not appease players. Play Brown, Taylor and Copeland.

If we lose, so be it. At least it won’t be with hanging heads, mopey demeanors and throwing sweatbands.

 

[Orangezoo]

Agreed. Although I wasn’t reacting to just that one benching. And, JB determined that he wanted QC in that previous game, with a lead, and then quickly determined he was wrong in wanting that… because… reasons. So, I guess he was wrong before he was right? If he left him in and QC didn’t make another mistake, what then? Comes down to how you trust a player will react to a mistake and if they can learn from it on the court. I would like to believe that a player we recruited as a playmaking ‘guard’ is intelligent enough to self-correct a glaring mistake on the fly. Some of our Players get that opportunity, some of the time….

Funny - I rewatched that TO and while Quadir should have been more aware of Symir pulling up, Symir should have never pulled up. He wasn't sprinting out and should have.

 

[Orangezoo]

Copeland shows you more in 5 minutes than Bell’s shown in 10+ games.

Benny’s effort and focus is inconsistent at best.

I want to win games, not appease players. Play Brown, Taylor and Copeland.

If we lose, so be it. At least it won’t be with hanging heads, mopey demeanors and throwing sweatbands.

Yeah give me 40 mins of all you got and I'll take a L with that because that is a winning approach even if it doesn't always work out.

 

[Zelda Zonk]

Funny - I rewatched that TO and while Quadir should have been more aware of Symir pulling up, Symir should have never pulled up. He wasn't sprinting out and should have.

Perhaps. Still, it was wildly bad and the situation called for a more conservative approach. I’ve said before that QC might have fantastic vision, but how he executes passes is often sloppy. He’ll pass high, wide, low—even simple passes, seemingly without concern of how/where it would be most effective for the player to catch them. One specific play that’s stuck in my head—a one-handed ‘touch’ pass back to the top of the key that almost went over the PG’s head. Maybe taking too much for granted, not focusing on the little things?

 

[Orangezoo]

Perhaps. Still, it was wildly bad and the situation called for a more conservative approach. I’ve said before that QC might have fantastic vision, but how he executes passes is often sloppy. He’ll pass high, wide, low—even simple passes, seemingly without concern of how/where it would be most effective for the player to catch them. One specific play that’s stuck in my head—a one-handed ‘touch’ pass back to the top of the key that almost went over the PG’s head. Maybe taking too much for granted, not focusing on the little things?

Not saying the wild decision making is ok. That said with a purpose and role, you match his energy and effort and you are getting far more than you are losing along with some chemistry which is often where guys like QC improve when teammates are accustomed. Also we are lacking alternatives with what Benny and Bell are giving us right now. It's not a surefire starter being benched over a clear bench player at this point. It's a who is going to give us something vs nothing kind of scenario.

 

[AlaskaSU]

Play Copeland.
I'd rather see freshmen that bring lots of energy and sometimes try to do too much -but also learning/growing from their mistakes, vs freshmen playing with questionable energy and/or scared of being sat back down.
W's and L's don't matter now IMO -hard to imagine making the tournament-
Therefore give minutes and experience to the players who are bringing it with the goal of developing a solid team for next season.

Next season gives me the jitters. Got my fingers crossed regarding the portal. In 5 decades I've never been this concerned. On the bright side, we have some good pieces that might attract transfers.

 

[AlaskaSU]

Interesting point as to whether a player having a bad game is likely to turn it around if coach leaves him in. My guess is that an in game turn-around is more likely for an experienced player than a rookie. The rookie is more likely to force things in an effort to make up, thus co.pounding errors. The experienced player is apt to be more patient and take what the defense gives him.

 

[MikeSU02]

Copeland shows you more in 5 minutes than Bell’s shown in 10+ games.

Benny’s effort and focus is inconsistent at best.

I want to win games, not appease players. Play Brown, Taylor and Copeland.

If we lose, so be it. At least it won’t be with hanging heads, mopey demeanors and throwing sweatbands.

I agree with you, but here's the thing, we ARE LOSING with starting these guys.

Change it up. Who cares?

This isn't plucky 6 seed that may make a final four run.

Get better, make changes.