Reason this team isn't capable of turning it around: our 3P pass defense...

[RF2044]

...gives everyone that plays us a huge advantage.

Teams that aren't as good -- like Colgate, VCU, and Georgetown -- get the playing field leveled by being able to get wide open three point shot after three point shot.

Will there be games when the opposition can't capitalize? Sure -- such as the FSU game. But just about every other team has exploited our congenital incapability to defend the three point line -- especially on the baselines.

We're going to play games where things are clicking and we shoot the lights out, and on those nights we'll be able to play with / beat anybody.

And we're going to play games where we're not shooting well, and it's going to be a massive uphill climb to win.

But we'll never surmount the crest and get things turned around, because even poor shooting teams are going to have their eyes light up with the open looks we provide. The ability to bomb away and get wide open shots is going to be the great equalizer all season long, and put us in a massive disadvantaged position against the good teams we play.

Did I hear them say that we were 358th out of 358 D1 college basketball teams in three point defense? I mean, that is not just bad, it's worst case scenario.

 

[rrlbees]

...gives everyone that plays us a huge advantage.

Teams that aren't as good -- like Colgate, VCU, and Georgetown -- get the playing field leveled by being able to get wide open three point shot after three point shot.

Will there be games when the opposition can't capitalize? Sure -- such as the FSU game. But just about every other team has exploited our congenital incapability to defend the three point line -- especially on the baselines.

We're going to play games where things are clicking and we shoot the lights out, and on those nights we'll be able to play with / beat anybody.

And we're going to play games where we're not shooting well, and it's going to be a massive uphill climb to win.

But we'll never surmount the crest and get things turned around, because even poor shooting teams are going to have their eyes light up with the open looks we provide. The ability to bomb away and get wide open shots is going to be the great equalizer all season long, and put us in a massive disadvantaged position against the good teams we play.

Did I hear them say that we were 358th out of 358 D1 college basketball teams in three point defense? I mean, that is not just bad, it's worst case scenario.

We’re 210th. Which is still bad.

 

[jdubs30]

Not to ironic, but literally all of our games will come down to our shooting vs their shooting/offensive rebounding. Our remaining schedule isn’t too daunting due to the ACC being down. In games we make our shots, we will most likely win. In games where the other team makes their shots ( or destroys us on the offensive glass), we will lose, even if we make our shots.

Any “stops” we get on the defensive end are usually lazy passes from the opposition or they miss a wide open 3

We just don’t do enough things good to win games where we aren’t making shots

 

[jncuse]

#358 in three point field goals allowed
#358 in three point field goals attempts as a % of total attempts (52% entering today)
#218 in three point % defence

The problem is that inherently the 3 point shot gives up more offensive rebounds than other shots. And when when you give up more three point attempts as a % of shots than anybody else, and you are already a bad rebounding team, it makes the defensive rebounding a bigger issue.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

#358 in three point field goals allowed
#358 in three point field goals attempts as a % of total attempts (52% entering today)
#218 in three point % defence

The problem is that inherently the 3 point shot gives up more offensive rebounds than other shots. And when when you give up more three point attempts as a % of shots than anybody else, and you are already a bad rebounding team, it makes the defensive rebounding a bigger issue.

So what I'm taking from this is we're playing the hoops equivalent of a running a hurry up offense that gets a lot of 3 and outs and leaves the defense out to dry in football.

It's a bold strategy, Cotton.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

...gives everyone that plays us a huge advantage.

Teams that aren't as good -- like Colgate, VCU, and Georgetown -- get the playing field leveled by being able to get wide open three point shot after three point shot.

Will there be games when the opposition can't capitalize? Sure -- such as the FSU game. But just about every other team has exploited our congenital incapability to defend the three point line -- especially on the baselines.

We're going to play games where things are clicking and we shoot the lights out, and on those nights we'll be able to play with / beat anybody.

And we're going to play games where we're not shooting well, and it's going to be a massive uphill climb to win.

But we'll never surmount the crest and get things turned around, because even poor shooting teams are going to have their eyes light up with the open looks we provide. The ability to bomb away and get wide open shots is going to be the great equalizer all season long, and put us in a massive disadvantaged position against the good teams we play.

Did I hear them say that we were 358th out of 358 D1 college basketball teams in three point defense? I mean, that is not just bad, it's worst case scenario.

Gave this a like for a quality perspective, but using congenital alone also merited a like.

 

[djcon57]

So what I'm taking from this is we're playing the hoops equivalent of a running a hurry up offense that gets a lot of 3 and outs and leaves the defense out to dry in football.

It's a bold strategy, Cotton.

there was a lot of talk that we’d be shooting like the Golden State Warriors of college basketball...without realizing Golden State had Draymond Green and Andre Iguodola in their heyday (and again this year)

 

[OttoinGrotto]

there was a lot of talk that we’d be shooting like the Golden State Warriors of college basketball...without realizing Golden State had Draymond Green and Andre Iguodola in their heyday (and again this year)

It's like when people said that our football system on offense should feature the tight end like the Patriots, without acknowledging that maybe having Brady and Gronk played a part in why that was successful.

 

[Ghost]

We're going to play games where things are clicking and we shoot the lights out, and on those nights we'll be able to play with / beat anybody.

And we're going to play games where we're not shooting well, and it's going to be a massive uphill climb to win.

Notre Dame, minus the 1 or 2 athletes they usually have, and in a zone. That's us!

At some point we will run off a couple games where Cole/Buddy are lights out, and we thrash some decent teams who just end up shooting it out with us.

We are capable of that, and as you saw that with Florida State, once they couldn't hit shots, and couldn't pressure us, we were able to take control of the game even without tremendous shooting. So, it is possible to win even without tremendous shooting. However, hoping for that most nights, with our defense, is going to be a tough get most of the time.

 

[PhatOrange]

Lavin said we were the worst 3p D team in all of D1 basketball. All 300 teams. We’ve allowed the most 3s.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Awful loss.

 

[Scooch]

I think the concept of the 2-3 zone is still good and can work, it's just that other than the center we don't have a single guy in our starting lineup that is the typical rangy guy that makes the zone formidable.

Yep, any defense can work if you have the right personnel to execute it. It was just a couple seasons ago that our zone D was fantastic. But as everyone can see, we don’t have the athletes to pull off the zone, or anything else for that matter.

 

[Cuse#1]

I think the concept of the 2-3 zone is still good and can work, it's just that other than the center we don't have a single guy in our starting lineup that is the typical rangy guy that makes the zone formidable.

I mentioned that and we could be much better but alot of the things i said still apply. Also it seems like were getting to the point where getting to the dance barely is considered a success while our brand continues its slide to mediocrity at best

Plus boehiem is his own worst enemy. He could a been even better, for instance... he should be like most coaches do is adapt your scheme to your personel, not the other way around. with that its not just the zone, his rotation or lack thereof and 1 that really pisses me off is the way he bashes players during postgames!

finally, he gonna be 78 years old. Enough already. Go enjoy the rest of your life with your family, is 1,000 wins that important??? He'll never catch coach K. anyway so who cares!

 

[Cuse#1]

Yep, any defense can work if you have the right personnel to execute it. It was just a couple seasons ago that our zone D was fantastic. But as everyone can see, we don’t have the athletes to pull off the zone, or anything else for that matter.

Were not winning another tittle with that defense! not happening. Def. dont see another carmelo walking thru the door.
Ill put it like this: id take tony bennetts worst defensive team over our best one over the years anyday!! Much more consistency & finally wont be one of the worst rebounding teams every year.

Virginia defense and many others are, even rutgers as much as that irratates me to say are good because of hard work, accountability, & cohesiveness. Ours is pretty much 3pt averages, meaning the other team cant make enough shots which has bitin us in the a$# sooo many times

 

[OrangeFoo]

Steph Curry broke the zone as a primary defense. Now even crappy teams like the Hoyas have at least two or three dudes who can hit open threes from the baseline and at least one or two guys with in the gym range. In the heyday of the zone most teams had one designated three point guy and it was relatively easy for JB to shade the zone to take him out. Now it’s too hard because the zone will always give up an open shot if the other team executes well… and other then fsu most teams have executed very well.

I’m not saying we should go full man either because this team would be a disaster there as well. We need to outscore teams to have a shot but we can’t create enough good shots because ironically enough we don’t have an offense we can execute well enough to generate good looks. I’ve made my peace with the zone, but I can’t understand playing iso-ball with a bunch of slow dudes who can’t beat their man 1:1 and without a true point guard.

 

[RF2044]

#358 in three point field goals allowed
#358 in three point field goals attempts as a % of total attempts (52% entering today)
#218 in three point % defence

The problem is that inherently the 3 point shot gives up more offensive rebounds than other shots. And when when you give up more three point attempts as a % of shots than anybody else, and you are already a bad rebounding team, it makes the defensive rebounding a bigger issue.

Thank you for clarifying.

 

[Cuseball]

...gives everyone that plays us a huge advantage.

Teams that aren't as good -- like Colgate, VCU, and Georgetown -- get the playing field leveled by being able to get wide open three point shot after three point shot.

Will there be games when the opposition can't capitalize? Sure -- such as the FSU game. But just about every other team has exploited our congenital incapability to defend the three point line -- especially on the baselines.

We're going to play games where things are clicking and we shoot the lights out, and on those nights we'll be able to play with / beat anybody.

And we're going to play games where we're not shooting well, and it's going to be a massive uphill climb to win.

But we'll never surmount the crest and get things turned around, because even poor shooting teams are going to have their eyes light up with the open looks we provide. The ability to bomb away and get wide open shots is going to be the great equalizer all season long, and put us in a massive disadvantaged position against the good teams we play.

Did I hear them say that we were 358th out of 358 D1 college basketball teams in three point defense? I mean, that is not just bad, it's worst case scenario.

Agreed and it’s not really repairable. The easiest solution would be to force feed Frank or Benny minutes at one of the forward spots. Benny is not good defensively at the moment but with time he has so much more athleticism and offers upside. An athletic forward would cut down in some of those open looks form the corners.

The other solution is more
Minutes for Symir. Helps you up top and then you can even slide Buddy to SF for a few minutes. Buddy at SF only works if you have the other forward as Benny or Frank.

Both scenarios lead to less minutes for Jimmy so not sure how likely.

Alternatively, the second half performances are now fact. Switch up your starting five a bit for the first five minutes of the second half to focus on defense. I know it’s not likely but it’s all I got.

Cuse!

 

[alphaorange]

imo, there has been a fundamental change in the game in the last 5 years. SU has ALWAYS given up open threes but teams didn't focus on that as part of there offense until recently, so most teams didn't shoot it consistently well . When they did shoot it well against us, the zone failed. Usually, we always would say some scrub had a career day against us when the reality was that those type of guys could always shoot like that but we gave them the open looks. Once teams started focusing on that, more kids started practicing them. I doubt Steph Curry is responsible in a major way, but once the 3 became a more efficient way of scoring in the NBA, it was only a matter of time before it trickled down to college ball. With players having range to 25', the zone is dead. It might make them make a few more passes and use more clock, but the open shots will be there.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Yep, any defense can work if you have the right personnel to execute it. It was just a couple seasons ago that our zone D was fantastic. But as everyone can see, we don’t have the athletes to pull off the zone, or anything else for that matter.

Athletes huh

 

[FrancoPizza]

Yep, any defense can work if you have the right personnel to execute it. It was just a couple seasons ago that our zone D was fantastic. But as everyone can see, we don’t have the athletes to pull off the zone, or anything else for that matter.

I would argue the heyday of the zone is long gone. Athletes or no athletes.

 

[Cuse#1]

Agreed and it’s not really repairable. The easiest solution would be to force feed Frank or Benny minutes at one of the forward spots. Benny is not good defensively at the moment but with time he has so much more athleticism and offers upside. An athletic forward would cut down in some of those open looks form the corners.

The other solution is more
Minutes for Symir. Helps you up top and then you can even slide Buddy to SF for a few minutes. Buddy at SF only works if you have the other forward as Benny or Frank.

Both scenarios lead to less minutes for Jimmy so not sure how likely.

Alternatively, the second half performances are now fact. Switch up your starting five a bit for the first five minutes of the second half to focus on defense. I know it’s not likely but it’s all I got.

Cuse!

boeheims coaching style has become so predictable that no lead at the half makes me feel comfortable

 

[Cuse#1]

imo, there has been a fundamental change in the game in the last 5 years. SU has ALWAYS given up open threes but teams didn't focus on that as part of there offense until recently, so most teams didn't shoot it consistently well . When they did shoot it well against us, the zone failed. Usually, we always would say some scrub had a career day against us when the reality was that those type of guys could always shoot like that but we gave them the open looks. Once teams started focusing on that, more kids started practicing them. I doubt Steph Curry is responsible in a major way, but once the 3 became a more efficient way of scoring in the NBA, it was only a matter of time before it trickled down to college ball. With players having range to 25', the zone is dead. It might make them make a few more passes and use more clock, but the open shots will be there.

exactly and every game we play even the commentaters explain the way to break down the zone to get a open shot!
its like anything, muscle memory & are allowed to continue in the flow of their offense. I know we are not a good man2man team i bet mostly because he's not a good man2man teacher, never practices it, or whatever the reason but I REFUSE to believe thats its more on the players than on the coach!!

Plus one thing i wondered is why did we switch to all zone to begin with. Im only 40 so im only real up too date since the mid 80s but i know we had tremendous athletes at that time which should have been boehiems 1st title in 1987 i think vs indiana but i have my idea why he probaly switched permamently.

But again back to his lack to adapt to the modern game.

 

[miamicuse]

We have the ameoba defense. The players move in ameoba pace.

 

[GucciCuse]

Maybe we can get this guy to transfer from St. John Fisher - assuming he can cover the corner 3.

 

[STEVEHOLT]

Maybe we can get this guy to transfer from St. John Fisher - assuming he can cover the corner 3.

Holy.. that guy has good vision .. he should have been a drop back Qb