Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="manleyzoo, post: 2515612, member: 519"]
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.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?