Red's system | Page 5 | Syracusefan.com

Red's system

Is Red the same age/class as the Fab 5?

He should offer Juwan Howard a spot on the staff if they have any relationship. I'm sure he'd prefer NBA but you never know.
To punch other coaches?
 
If you want to call that motion, be my guest.
Or... maybe you just don't understand what a motion offense is. The conepts they were running were a motion offense. Their consistent execution of those conepts was the issue. But, it was a system.

I think this is ridiculous conversation. Teams that like to run still have to do something in the half court.
Yeah, ridiculous. A transition offense is a fastbreak offense that will - brace yourself - transition into the regular offense if the first look is not there.
 
I personally liked Wooden's system. Bring in 5 star talent year
after year and let them do their thing. No "system" is a universal
formula for success. The best coaches work with the talent they
have and try to maximize individual skills within a team concept.
When the sum is greater than the total of the individual pieces you
have a great "system".

If we're talking about John Wooden, that is most certainly not the case. He didn't just "let them do their thing". Have you watched any old UCLA games?

They had a very structured high post motion offense with lots of backcuts like Pete Carill used to do at Princeton. They played a 2-2-1 zone press on defense. He taught players in the low post, and even out to midrange on the wing to shoot jump shots using the backboard for greater accuracy.

Wooden was an outstanding teacher and tactician. You don't win 10 national championships just because you have great players and roll out the ball, or else John Calipari would have that many by now.
 
Or... maybe you just don't understand what a motion offense is. The conepts they were running were a motion offense. Their consistent execution of those conepts was the issue. But, it was a system.


Yeah, ridiculous. A transition offense is a fastbreak offense that will - brace yourself - transition into the regular offense if the first look is not there.

You don't have to get salty. The offense you described was seldom on display for the first 3 months of the season.
 
The reality is that we didn’t see it yet and I believe every time Autry was making progress with the young guys it completely got derailed. Then he had to make concessions with the roster he had left. This is how I saw the 3 mini-seasons we had and his system:

1. Nov-Dec: Depth and aggressive D working. Streaky offense and poor shot selection. New guys learning and finding a role. Big but not unexpected losses to Zags/Tenn/@UVA. 10-3 start.

The 5 goes down. And the 3 backup centers on the roster are not even close to ready to play even minimal mins in the ACC.

2. January: Defense falls apart piece by piece as injuries pile up. Solid play at the dome with a nice road win at Pitt struggling at the time. The scout is out how to shut us down. 4-5

Wake debacle and Benny dismissed

3. Feb-Mar: Offense comes alive with a 6 man rotation but same old issues linger. Maturity, physicality and depth issues remain. 6-4 finish.

20-12. It’s Kindve a miracle. The roster is of course on Autry along with the rollercoaster of a year. Now we wait for year 2.
 
And not just any five stars. That included Alcindor (the best college player ever) and Bill Walton (one of the best ever).

If we had got Bron and say Luka to come to Cuse and paired them with all-Americans respectively, people probably would be waxing a bit more poetic about JB (not taking anything away from JB’s many accomplishments, obviously). But y’all get the point.
To be fair he did win some before Alcindor and after Walton.
 
Or... maybe you just don't understand what a motion offense is. The conepts they were running were a motion offense. Their consistent execution of those conepts was the issue. But, it was a system.


Yeah, ridiculous. A transition offense is a fastbreak offense that will - brace yourself - transition into the regular offense if the first look is not there.
What kind of motion offense has the ball stay in the point guards hands the whole possession all the time
 
What kind of motion offense has the ball stay in the point guards hands the whole possession all the time
Ridiculous hyperbole aside, do you think the PG plays that way at times b/c Red doesn't have an offensive system?
 
Yeah it's interesting in that nobody has really answered the question.
If the question is "What value did Straughn being as a coach?" I think it's hard to say.


He had a reputation as an analysis guy who could help the offensive design and game plan.

I saw no real evidence of that. Every so often, we would run something that looked like a play, and I'd get hopeful... "That must be what they're working on!" And then we would never see it again.

There is no cohesive, repeated offense except the isolation.

As I've stated before, when you've got an elite isolation player like Judah freaking Mintz, sometimes you let him play isolation until the opposition shows they can stop it.

The problem comes when Mintz had been stopped. We never figured out how to score consistently when Mintz wasn't getting to the basket and/or the free throw line.

General 20 did a breakdown post where Syracuse started rolling Brown after the pick and making teams pay for hedging on the dribbler by getting Brown the ball in the middle... Then we stopped it. We had some games where Bell had a ton of movement off the ball and earned open looks. Then we stopped it.

It felt like we just never got an offensive identity other than "Give it to Mintz and watch."

That isn't going to work next year. Maybe Mintz was the problem?

Straughn didn't seem to be some world beating offensive game planner who made the team better. If that was his role, he hasn't reached tenure yet.

If he's really just a recruiter, then that's important, but the team needs to win, not just recruit.
 
Ridiculous hyperbole aside, do you think the PG plays that way at times b/c Red doesn't have an offensive system?
I don't understand wanting mintz to play like he did or allowing it. Hopefully next year we see something better and we won't have to resort to ridiculous hyperbole in describing it as a motion offense
 
Last edited:
I don't understand wanting mintz to play like he did it allowing it. Hopefully next year we see something better and we won't have to resort to ridiculous hyperbole in describing it as a motion offense
I agree with the bolded. JM is a combo guard playing PG. He dominated the ball, forced his scoring opportunities way too often, and struggled with decision making most of the season. In a way, he was a victim of his own success. Few defenders could stay in front of him. He needed to develop more of PG mentality for the motion offense - any offense for that matter - to be more effective.

Not sure what the thinking was from Red's perspective. But I would guess that some of the "allowing" JM to play that way had something to do with not having a post scoring threat or enough consistent shooters after Bell. I've said before, I think Red was making chicken salad given the hand he was dealt.
 
If the question is "What value did Straughn being as a coach?" I think it's hard to say.


He had a reputation as an analysis guy who could help the offensive design and game plan.

I saw no real evidence of that. Every so often, we would run something that looked like a play, and I'd get hopeful... "That must be what they're working on!" And then we would never see it again.

There is no cohesive, repeated offense except the isolation.

As I've stated before, when you've got an elite isolation player like Judah freaking Mintz, sometimes you let him play isolation until the opposition shows they can stop it.

The problem comes when Mintz had been stopped. We never figured out how to score consistently when Mintz wasn't getting to the basket and/or the free throw line.

General 20 did a breakdown post where Syracuse started rolling Brown after the pick and making teams pay for hedging on the dribbler by getting Brown the ball in the middle... Then we stopped it. We had some games where Bell had a ton of movement off the ball and earned open looks. Then we stopped it.

It felt like we just never got an offensive identity other than "Give it to Mintz and watch."

That isn't going to work next year. Maybe Mintz was the problem?

Straughn didn't seem to be some world beating offensive game planner who made the team better. If that was his role, he hasn't reached tenure yet.

If he's really just a recruiter, then that's important, but the team needs to win, not just recruit.
Look they had a 55 point half with Judah getting 0. Then we scored 32 the second half and Judah got 15, and we almost blew the game.
 
"Jim Boeheim didn't have a system on defense."

"Sure, he did. the 2-3 zone."

"Yeah, but they didn't play it well, so doesn't count"

That's the level of debate we're seeing here.
Perfect djcon57
 
"Jim Boeheim didn't have a system on defense."

"Sure, he did. the 2-3 zone."

"Yeah, but they didn't play it well, so doesn't count"

That's the level of debate we're seeing here.
Whatever you say. I didn't think they played archaic iso ball well but I do think they played archaic iso ball

The biggest drawback of motion offenses is it can take the ball out of the hands of your main scorer. If only that were a problem at SU

How often did mintz pass and cut where bell had to fill or pass and screen away for bell.

Bell just parked all year

Mintz just dominated the ball all year

If they were running a motion offense and failing that much, fire autry immediately because he'd have to be terrible
 
Last edited:
Whatever you say. I didn't think they played archaic iso ball well but I do think they played archaic iso ball

The biggest drawback of motion offenses out can take the back out of the hands of your main scorer. If only that were a problem at SU

How often did mintz pass and cut where bell had to fill or pass and screen away for bell.

Bell just parked all year

Mintz just dominated the ball year
JJ and Mintz did that often. I would send you a link but you’d just ignore it so why bother.
 
Look they had a 55 point half with Judah getting 0. Then we scored 32 the second half and Judah got 15, and we almost blew the game.
This is a good point... Mintz being great at beating his man one on one as an individual does not make the team offense great.

My point is that there were some games this season, more than a few, where just letting Mintz beat his man was a good offense.

The problem came when it wasn't.

I remember watching a Phoenix Suns game back when they had Charles Barkley... He wasn't in his prime anymore, but he was a hell of an offensive player. They ran the same play easily 15 times in a row at one point.

Barkley gets post position, backs his mana couple dribbles. The double team comes, Barkley passes out, a very quick ball reversal occurs, and the guy in the opposite corner takes an open three. The couple of times they didn't double, Barkley casually pushed his guy under the basket and scored. It was kind is amazing and really kind of boring, but they scored at a very efficient rate, until the opposing coach subbed his whole team to break the pattern.

Sometimes you just let your guy do what he does well.

It really didn't feel like we had a solid plan for when Mintz couldn't just beat his guy.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,891
Messages
4,735,678
Members
5,930
Latest member
CuseGuy44

Online statistics

Members online
261
Guests online
1,099
Total visitors
1,360


Top Bottom