Recruiting for the Zone and Early Departures

[JOC44]

Well, I'll give you credit for admitting your agenda. But agenda driven posts can lead to contradictions. Much like you, when first you state "Why exclude some players because they don't fit the zone? That just has never made sense to me" and in the next breath state "Yes, Boeheim recruits players who aren't just a great fit for the zone". You will apparently go whichever way the wind is blowing to pile on and promote your cause. Loses some validity IMO.

The OP is trying to make the case that it is the Zone recruiting that is having SU lose people. I smell an agenda (not matter how much he tries to lawyerly deny it). Generally any team that can get NBA type players takes them. We just got some really good players that weren't obvious to everyone else that they were going early, making it harder to reload.

The not so long ago glory SU days have been with the 2 and done studs mixed in with excellent program recruits. It's time to get back to it, not abandon it. The correct direction is that of studs Baz, Carey, and OB, mixed in with Frank and PC. I'm excited about it. It's not the zones fault that we will lose Baz, OB, and Carey before 4 years, it's a conscious decision to be balling again with the Big Boys. And no way should this philosophy be abandoned.

What about this? The zone is looking like a mighty attractive place for a stud recruit?

You don't know what you are talking about, except to call me (as the OP) "lawyerly." I don't have a single problem with using the zone. Not one. I don't have a single problem with using the zone exclusively. I was simply making the agenda-less point that when we recruit for the zone, with tall guards and rangy, athletic forwards, those guys tend to have the potential that NBA teams will bet on without necessarily waiting to see big-time production in college. It's just something you have to live with when you focus your recruiting on tall, athletic guards, and long, rangy, athletic forwards. If you "smell" an agenda, you might consider going back and seeing how many of my past posts criticize the use of the zone. I believe the answer will be zero.

 

[Sgt Cuse]

You don't know what you are talking about, except to call me (as the OP) "lawyerly." I don't have a single problem with using the zone. Not one. I don't have a single problem with using the zone exclusively. I was simply making the agenda-less point that when we recruit for the zone, with tall guards and rangy, athletic forwards, those guys tend to have the potential that NBA teams will bet on without necessarily waiting to see big-time production in college. It's just something you have to live with when you focus your recruiting on tall, athletic guards, and long, rangy, athletic forwards. If you "smell" an agenda, you might consider going back and seeing how many of my past posts criticize the use of the zone. I believe the answer will be zero.

Fair enough, but I'm not sure the zone has anything to do with losing the players early. I don't think that case has been made. Good players get drafted by the NBA. Ennis and Dion are not zone exclusive. Anyone would have taken McC and Baz. If SU continues to bring in the best players it can, regardless of defense, it will probably continue to lose players early.

I think part of the problem is JB was able to identify unheralded excellent players and used them in ways that showcased them. And since they were unheralded, we weren't able to recruit a reload stud to fill the position. Add that to sanctions, coaching uncertainty, and injuries and this four year period is what we got.

At least with the normal stud, SU can explain the progression and hopefully reload - ie Baz. It's losing a one and done unheralded OB that would hurt more.

 

[Consigliere]

2009 -10 is 7-8 years ago.. Just sayin'... I'm hoping that your reference wasn't a tourney with his kids in it or desperation at the end of the year (NYS States) or backyard tourney.

we can somewhat agree on the succession. However, I do believe JB altered his plans; which caused Hop's wandering eye. Uncertainty in coaching w/ respect to recruits can be a deal killer. We still will have to cross that uncertainty bridge. Again, in my opinion we are just kicking the can down the road.

MM??? let's talk about him next year?????

Yes, on succession. Boeheim has no filter and it was becoming increasingly clear that he was not fully onboard with the retirement date. Not sure if it caused Hop's eyes to wander but it certainly made him more receptive to the UW offer in part out of loyalty to JB.

And no, I'm not talking about one of the Boeheim kids playing but Jim was here in Binghamton in the 2011-12 season watching the StopDWI Tournament and Neumann Goretti so 3 years before the first of the sanctions were imposed, right?

Not trying to be argumentative at all and there are certainly some things that could have been done differently that might have lessened our current down period (and let's face it. How many programs would kill to have a 19 - win regular season looked at as a down period?) But I put see the root cause falling much more on the sanctions than on anything our head coach bore responsibility for.

 

[manleyzoo]

Well, I'll give you credit for admitting your agenda. But agenda driven posts can lead to contradictions. Much like you, when first you state "Why exclude some players because they don't fit the zone? That just has never made sense to me" and in the next breath state "Yes, Boeheim recruits players who aren't just a great fit for the zone". You will apparently go whichever way the wind is blowing to pile on and promote your cause. Loses some validity IMO.

The OP is trying to make the case that it is the Zone recruiting that is having SU lose people. I smell an agenda (not matter how much he tries to lawyerly deny it). Generally any team that can get NBA type players takes them. We just got some really good players that weren't obvious to everyone else that they were going early, making it harder to reload.

The not so long ago glory SU days have been with the 2 and done studs mixed in with excellent program recruits. It's time to get back to it, not abandon it. The correct direction is that of studs Baz, Carey, and OB, mixed in with Frank and PC. I'm excited about it. It's not the zones fault that we will lose Baz, OB, and Carey before 4 years, it's a conscious decision to be balling again with the Big Boys. And no way should this philosophy be abandoned.

What about this? The zone is looking like a mighty attractive place for a stud recruit?

There's a big difference between making a point and pushing an agenda. They're not synonymous. My point is I'd like to see more than one defense, the flexibility of today's offenses demands it. I think that if we had some flexibility on defense, we might be able to land some of the top guys we fall short on. If I had repeatedly said I hate the zone no matter what the topic, that would be an agenda. (Example: "Hey, nice day today." "Yea, but I hate that damn zone.") I have said no such thing.

Second, cherry pick out of context much? What I said about Boeheim recruiting some players who aren't just a great fit for the zone wasn't in response to the OP, it was agreeing with you: <<SU recruits plenty of good basketball players who aren't just lengthy defensive specialists. From Flynn, DC2, KJ2, to Quade Green and most recently JG3.>> Where we differ, and to me it's the main point, is that even though Boeheim recruits players like the guys you mentioned, if he gets them he immediately forces them into playing zone. Flynn was probably a better on ball defender than at the top of the zone. But he was made into exclusively a zone defender. A switch in defenses every blue moon might have made better use of his skills. Same might have been true for Green. There's nothing to be said about KJ2, he couldn't play at this level. There's no agenda there, just the facts.

As for guys leaving early, no one knows for sure. My guess is that it's just a run of bad luck for us, no more than that, with guys that pass the NBA's eye test.

As for the stud recruits, let's hope the zone doesn't marginalize their natural skills at both ends of the court.

 

[Footey04]

Just a question what do you think are record would be if Jordan tucker had come here and got 25-30 mins a game?

 

[realorange]

Just a question what do you think are record would be if Jordan tucker had come here and got 25-30 mins a game?

How many threads are you going to post the question?

Are you his brother?

 

[721Comstock]

Now you are really fantasizing.

Yeah, that’s literally NEVER happened in the history of SU hoops.

He must have us confused with Dook or UK.

When we get one Top 10 guy, it’s cause for massive celebration, because it happens so infrequently.
When Duke or UK don’t get at least 2-3 Top 10 guys, their fan base grumbles about it.