Shaking Things Up.....

[newmexicuse]

I think this team needs to shake things up a bit. Yes, we were robbed at Duke, but it wasn't like we played a great game. Nor have we played well at all of late.

For some reason Jimmy has ignored my countless posts on seeing what Buss and/or Roberson might bring to the table if given some run. So, I will assume that more posts along those lines will not convince Jimmy to change his ways.

It seems to me that other than adding depth our biggest single need right now is an O spark off the bench.

So, my solution would be to start Silent G ahead of Trevor. This accomplishes a few things:

1. It will take some pressure off of Trevor who by and large hasn't played well in ACC action other than the ND game.

2. Trevor is a better scorer than G which increases the likelihood of giving us that spark off the bench.

3. It will balance our rotation better because right now G comes in w BMK, so we are putting two non-scorers on the floor simultaneously.

4. G delivers more assists and boards than does does Trevor as well as more length so he might meld better with the other four starters.

5. If Trevor doesn't start, maybe he will be less of a focal point for our opponents defenses which will in turn open up better looks for him.

6. G is gradually improving his scoring, maybe a starters job would put his confidence over the top.

 

[Waltdods]

I thought SU played quite well yesterday, and I've been generally less high on this team than most on this board. I'm not sure how anyone could have watched yesterday's game and not thought Syracuse (and Duke) was a legit national championship contender.

The specific proposal here, in addition to it's aint-ever-gonna-happen-dom, strikes me as kind of odd. To take the points one at a time:

"1. It will take some pressure off of Trevor who by and large hasn't played well in ACC action other than the ND game."

Or it will put more pressure on him as he tries to earn back his spot. Or neither. How is it possible to predict what the response will be?

"2. Trevor is a better scorer than G which increases the likelihood of giving us that spark off the bench."

Earlier in the year and in years past when Boeheim has had a "token starter", he's been slammed for letting the team get behind before he brings in his offensive stud. Now he's getting slammed for the opposite. Cooney hitting a couple threes early in the game is a "spark"; I'm not sure why that's less valuable than him doing the same eight minutes into the game.

"3. It will balance our rotation better because right now G comes in w BMK, so we are putting two non-scorers on the floor simultaneously."

This point I kind of agree with, although it has nothing to do with Cooney starting. Boeheim could very easily stagger his substitutions but for some reason doesn't. I'm not sure it's true that G isn't a scorer right now; it's been several games since he's passed up open shots and he's been pretty active in his recent play.

"4. G delivers more assists and boards than does does Trevor as well as more length so he might meld better with the other four starters."

I don't understand this. What is it about the other starters, as opposed to any other group G would play with, that suggests they are particularly in need of more assists, boards, and length? And again this has nothing to do with whether he starts or now; it's really an argument for him to play more.

"5. If Trevor doesn't start, maybe he will be less of a focal point for our opponents defenses which will in turn open up better looks for him."

This seems, umh, unlikely. No one forgot about Dion Waiters when he was the sixth man. No coach is going to forget about Trevor Cooney just because he's not announced with the starters.

 

[longislandcuse]

It won't happen but I can't say I disagree.

Right now G is giving us more than Cooney.

 

[newmexicuse]

I thought SU played quite well yesterday, and I've been generally less high on this team than most on this board. I'm not sure how anyone could have watched yesterday's game and not thought Syracuse (and Duke) was a legit national championship contender.

The specific proposal here, in addition to it's aint-ever-gonna-happen-dom, strikes me as kind of odd. To take the points one at a time:

"1. It will take some pressure off of Trevor who by and large hasn't played well in ACC action other than the ND game."

Or it will put more pressure on him as he tries to earn back his spot. Or neither. How is it possible to predict what the response will be?

Actually, considering how Trevor has been playing lately, there is much more upside potential than there is downside risk to this move.

"2. Trevor is a better scorer than G which increases the likelihood of giving us that spark off the bench."

Earlier in the year and in years past when Boeheim has had a "token starter", he's been slammed for letting the team get behind before he brings in his offensive stud. Now he's getting slammed for the opposite. Cooney hitting a couple threes early in the game is a "spark"; I'm not sure why that's less valuable than him doing the same eight minutes into the game.

I have always been against the token starter concept. This would not be a token starter situation where G would be pulled after three minutes or his first mistake.

"3. It will balance our rotation better because right now G comes in w BMK, so we are putting two non-scorers on the floor simultaneously."

This point I kind of agree with, although it has nothing to do with Cooney starting. Boeheim could very easily stagger his substitutions but for some reason doesn't. I'm not sure it's true that G isn't a scorer right now; it's been several games since he's passed up open shots and he's been pretty active in his recent play.

True, but that hasn't been the case of Jimmy's substitution patterns.

"4. G delivers more assists and boards than does does Trevor as well as more length so he might meld better with the other four starters."

I don't understand this. What is it about the other starters, as opposed to any other group G would play with, that suggests they are particularly in need of more assists, boards, and length? And again this has nothing to do with whether he starts or now; it's really an argument for him to play more.

If you do not see the need for more assists, rebounds or length than I have to wonder what team you have been watching.

"5. If Trevor doesn't start, maybe he will be less of a focal point for our opponents defenses which will in turn open up better looks for him."

This seems, umh, unlikely. No one forgot about Dion Waiters when he was the sixth man. No coach is going to forget about Trevor Cooney just because he's not announced with the starters.

There is only so much preperation time between games. Any extra time a coach spent preparing for g as a starter would be less preperation time to focus on trevor.

 

[Waltdods]

I guess I'm not fully understanding what you're advocating - I initially thought you were suggesting the minutes distribution more or less stay the same but that they flip who starts (to "shake things up"). Now it seems more like you're advocating Gbinje should be taking an increasingly larger share of Cooney's minutes (I guess even more so than he is already) in addition to the starting role. I would submit that that is a massive over-reaction to a couple games. The Notre Dame game that Cooney single-handedly won is less than 3 weeks in the rearview mirror. Since then, he's had perfectly fine games against Pitt, Clemson, and NC State and two admittedly not-great games against BC and Duke. He remains second in the league in steals.

I love that Gbinje is improving and think that's hugely important for the team going forward. But I think you have here a solution in search of a problem.

(And one small point on this: "Actually, considering how Trevor has been playing lately, there is much more upside potential than there is downside risk to this move." This is just pure assertion; you've just restated the original statement with more adjectives, rather than supporting the original statement.)

 

[Madbiker]

I think this team needs to shake things up a bit. Yes, we were robbed at Duke, but it wasn't like we played a great game. Nor have we played well at all of late.

For some reason Jimmy has ignored my countless posts on seeing what Buss and/or Roberson might bring to the table if given some run. So, I will assume that more posts along those lines will not convince Jimmy to change his ways.

It seems to me that other than adding depth our biggest single need right now is an O spark off the bench.

So, my solution would be to start Silent G ahead of Trevor. This accomplishes a few things:

1. It will take some pressure off of Trevor who by and large hasn't played well in ACC action other than the ND game.

2. Trevor is a better scorer than G which increases the likelihood of giving us that spark off the bench.

3. It will balance our rotation better because right now G comes in w BMK, so we are putting two non-scorers on the floor simultaneously.

4. G delivers more assists and boards than does does Trevor as well as more length so he might meld better with the other four starters.

5. If Trevor doesn't start, maybe he will be less of a focal point for our opponents defenses which will in turn open up better looks for him.

6. G is gradually improving his scoring, maybe a starters job would put his confidence over the top.

Interesting points. IMO there is no chance that JB would take away Cooney's starting spot. He seems the type who needs his confidence boosted to play well and this would likely have a negative effect on his psyche and play. But if he continues to struggle and not score, you might well see JB give MG more and more time until they are playing about equal minutes...but only if MG is aggressive and scores some points. You can't have a SG that doesn't score.

 

[longislandcuse]

I guess I'm not fully understanding what you're advocating - I initially thought you were suggesting the minutes distribution more or less stay the same but that they flip who starts (to "shake things up"). Now it seems more like you're advocating Gbinje should be taking an increasingly larger share of Cooney's minutes (I guess even more so than he is already) in addition to the starting role. I would submit that that is a massive over-reaction to a couple games. The Notre Dame game that Cooney single-handedly won is less than 3 weeks in the rearview mirror. Since then, he's had perfectly fine games against Pitt, Clemson, and NC State and two admittedly not-great games against BC and Duke. He remains second in the league in steals.

I love that Gbinje is improving and think that's hugely important for the team going forward. But I think you have here a solution in search of a problem.

(And one small point on this: "Actually, considering how Trevor has been playing lately, there is much more upside potential than there is downside risk to this move." This is just pure assertion; you've just restated the original statement with more adjectives, rather than supporting the original statement.)

If we're not going to be able to score, G makes us scary on defense.. Not just elite, not just great, scary. Like last years tourney run scary.

Combine that with the fact G takes it to the basket, rebounds and can shoot the three pretty well and I think you could justify bringing Cooney off the bench as a spark.

At the very least G needs more minutes, whether its keeping Cooney fresh or giving Fair a rest, G needs to be out there more.

 

[pearl31]

Oh, I'm fairly certain the events of the past week are a more-than-sufficient shake up. Forward ho, and the remaining teams on our schedule had best beware.

 

[EnnisEnvy]

Contrary to many people, I think this week will help more than hurt. BC played their Super Bowl against us when we weren't really acting like we had any fire. We came back and fought hard and almost won at Cameron. We will no longer be #1 and undefeated so there is no pressure on us. Now everyone will say how overrated we are and I think that ups our guys' intensity and focus. I really thought we might get blown out vs Duke with how we had been playing and I though we had a good chance of losing to MD and UVA. I now think we win out.

 

[SWC75]

We mustn't forget Cooney's hidden assists: those drives to the basket by others that are made possible by the fact that one defender must follow Cooney wherever he goes. They aren't following the G-man where he goes.

 

[anomander]

i'm trying to decide if this was a serious post or not? is my sarcasm meter off?

 

[rrlbees]

I like G a lot. Mostly because he gives us flexibility and depth at 3 positions but also because while he may not do anything great, he does most everything well. He's a pretty steady player. Even though he scored 8 points last night, he didn't make a basket the previous 2 games. Let's not go overboard now. JBs not going to over react based on 1 game.

 

[domestu]

Boeheim is going to keep Cooney in the starting lineup but he will likely to see less playing time if he continues to struggle like he has during the last two months. He played fewer minutes against Duke than he has in any other ACC game except Wake Forest.

Trevor has hit more than three 3-point shots only once since the Nova game and his shooting has really stagnated our offense. Cooney has only made 34% of his 3-point shots in ACC contests and it drops below 28% when you subtract the Notre Dame numbers.

Syracuse is next to last in the league in 3's made and we really need to shake up our offensive production before we head into the Big Dance.

Go Cuse!

 

[stuckinbig11]

:crazy:

 

[rstone7727]

Interesting thoughts, G played a great game against Duke and deserves more time. Not sure if he'll get it though as it's difficult to follow JB's thought process as far as PT goes. Send him an email, maybe he'll go for it...

 

[newmexicuse]

We mustn't forget Cooney's hidden assists: those drives to the basket by others that are made possible by the fact that one defender must follow Cooney wherever he goes. They aren't following the G-man where he goes.

Cooney has to do more than provide hidden assets. Compared to G he rebounds and assists at less than half the rate. Cooney is out there to shoot threes effectively. He has not performed well in that regard in ACC play. The hidden asset theory might be true if he was making his teammates better irrespective of his trey shooting. I do not see that at all, and the proof is how much we have struggled of late as a team.

Though G does not have Trevor's quick release, he is shooting a higher trey % for the season as compared to Trevor. In fact, G is leading the team in trey percentage.

If you look at your own net point analysis, Trevor is ahead of G for the season, but I would venture a guess that G is ahead of Trevor in ACC play or at the very least ahead of Trevor in ACC play if you exclude the ND game. Perhaps that would be a useful exercise if you have the time.

 

[SWC75]

Cooney has to do more than provide hidden assets. Compared to G he rebounds and assists at less than half the rate. Cooney is out there to shoot threes effectively. He has not performed well in that regard in ACC play. The hidden asset theory might be true if he was making his teammates better irrespective of his trey shooting. I do not see that at all, and the proof is how much we have struggled of late as a team.

Though G does not have Trevor's quick release, he is shooting a higher trey % for the season as compared to Trevor. In fact, G is leading the team in trey percentage.

If you look at your own net point analysis, Trevor is ahead of G for the season, but I would venture a guess that G is ahead of Trevor in ACC play or at the very least ahead of Trevor in ACC play if you exclude the ND game. Perhaps that would be a useful exercise if you have the time.

I won't exclude the ND game because that is part of the record. Or should I also exclude the first BC game? TC did very well that night, too.

Miami: Trevor Cooney 0NP in 39 minutes Michael Gbinije 0NP in 4 minutes
Virginia Tech TC 8/31 MG 6/11
Boston College TC 21/35 MG -1/5
North Carolina TC 1/36 MG 5/10
Pittsburgh TC 2/32 MG 1/8
Miami TC 10/37, MG 0/6
Wake Forest TC 6/28 MG 1/12
Duke TC 12/38 MG 3/12
Notre Dame TC 33/39 MG 2/6
Clemson TC 13/33 MG 4/16
Pittsburgh TC 5/34 MG 8/22
North Carolina State TC 5/35 MG -2/17
Boston College TC -1/40 MG 0/15
Duke TC 3\/31 MG 6/20

Totals: TC 118/488 (9.7NP/40) MG 33/164, (8.0NO/40).

So Trevor Cooney is still ahead and his "Cooney assists" are not reflected in those numbers.

 

[domestu]

I won't exclude the ND game because that is part of the record.

Totals: TC 118/488 (9.7NP/40) MG 33/164, (8.0NO/40).

So Trevor Cooney is still ahead and his "Cooney assists" are not reflected in those numbers.

SWC, the information and insight you bring us about Syracuse sports is really appreciated.

My post in this thread focused only on Cooney since he plays so many more minutes and his perimeter shooting has had a much larger impact in our overall offensive production in league games. And Gbinije just hasn't taken enough 3's for me to form a strong opinion that he can help improve our perimeter shooting woes.

I looked at your net points report tonight and one thing really jumped out at me. Trevor has 293 net points in 868 minutes played this season which means he had 175 net points in 380 minutes during our thirteen non-conference games and only 118 net points in 488 minutes during the fourteen ACC games. I understand that you face better opponents in league play but is this sort of drop-off in net points typical for a starting player in conference games? Starters play a lot more minutes after New Years and I know many players in past seasons have actually put up bigger numbers in league play like Grant is doing this season.

As you always point out, net points does not reflect all of the different things that a player contributes to his team.

Go Cuse!

 

[jec1521]

How about having Grant come off the bench like early in the season? Start with Keita and Rak for a minute or two.

 

[SmilinBob]

I believe it is as simple as each player doing well on offense thus opening it up for each other. They have to recognize the double teams and see who is open and that is what has to be done to sooth this offensive slump. Having the ball...putting your head down and driving is what other D's want. Open up the spacing and have Roc get the ball, who doubles him recognize and move the ball. Maybe I'm being simplistic, I don't know.

 

[newmexicuse]

I won't exclude the ND game because that is part of the record. Or should I also exclude the first BC game? TC did very well that night, too.

Miami: Trevor Cooney 0NP in 39 minutes Michael Gbinije 0NP in 4 minutes
Virginia Tech TC 8/31 MG 6/11
Boston College TC 21/35 MG -1/5
North Carolina TC 1/36 MG 5/10
Pittsburgh TC 2/32 MG 1/8
Miami TC 10/37, MG 0/6
Wake Forest TC 6/28 MG 1/12
Duke TC 12/38 MG 3/12
Notre Dame TC 33/39 MG 2/6
Clemson TC 13/33 MG 4/16
Pittsburgh TC 5/34 MG 8/22
North Carolina State TC 5/35 MG -2/17
Boston College TC -1/40 MG 0/15
Duke TC 3\/31 MG 6/20

Totals: TC 118/488 (9.7NP/40) MG 33/164, (8.0NO/40).

So Trevor Cooney is still ahead and his "Cooney assists" are not reflected in those numbers.

Thx so much for this analysis. What I find interesting is that Trevor got 54 of his 118 net points in his two best games combined. In the two losses MG has more total net points in absolute numbers in about half of Trevor's minutes.

Irrespective of whether anybody agrees with my original post about starting G over Trevor, a couple of things are patently clear:

1. When Trevor gets on a roll we are a much better team.

2. G is improving his contributions relative to Trevor, but at this point in time he doesn't bring enough scoring to the table to be a legit starting 2G. Hopefully, he can improve in that regard if asked to expand his role.

3. In terms of the 2g position, the most important thing is to find a way to get Trevor going much more consistently. Does Trevor have the talent level to do that or is he simply a one trick pony that opponents can neutralize when they really want to ???

4. I return to my original post theory, based upon what I have seen recently with this team's play, I think we need to shake things up. I am making no judgment on Trevor long term, except that it is apparent he is too inconsistent at this stage of the game for a team that hopes to win a NC and desperately needs more trey shooting. Short term, I think his coming off the bench will accomplish a shake up and hopefully improve the team per my OP.

 

[TBCuse11]

It won't happen but I can't say I disagree.

Right now G is giving us more than Cooney.

I have be campaigning all year to get G more playing time. He is better than Trevor overall, period. Honestly, it isnt even close. We got some Fools Gold with TC earlier in the year, and he did win the ND game for us... other than that, its been ugly for many weeks now. He can not get open. When he does, its Clank City,USA.

G is simply better. His shooting is good enough (actually better than TC since teams sag off him), and he is just more effective.

 

[SWC75]

SWC, the information and insight you bring us about Syracuse sports is really appreciated.

My post in this thread focused only on Cooney since he plays so many more minutes and his perimeter shooting has had a much larger impact in our overall offensive production in league games. And Gbinije just hasn't taken enough 3's for me to form a strong opinion that he can help improve our perimeter shooting woes.

I looked at your net points report tonight and one thing really jumped out at me. Trevor has 293 net points in 868 minutes played this season which means he had 175 net points in 380 minutes during our thirteen non-conference games and only 118 net points in 488 minutes during the fourteen ACC games. I understand that you face better opponents in league play but is this sort of drop-off in net points typical for a starting player in conference games? Starters play a lot more minutes after New Years and I know many players in past seasons have actually put up bigger numbers in league play like Grant is doing this season.

As you always point out, net points does not reflect all of the different things that a player contributes to his team.

Go Cuse!

It also doesn't represent how the other team is defensing us. Trevor eats up a defender who can't guard anyone or any place else. G-man does not. I don't think it's his fault that he can't shake the guy. The problem is we don't have another reliable jump shooter on the other side who could stretch the defense in that direction and force other teams to play us honestly instead of what amoutns to a bax and one.

 

[AZOrange]

We played pretty well against Duke. We must be watching different games