Some thoughts

[hplare]

I've been watching Syracuse Basketball since 1943. Yes, I'm that old. Now that longevity gives me no claim to better knowledge of the game than any who post her, but I have witnessed a lot of evolution along the way. I've seen rules disappear. Hand-checking used to be a foul. There was a time dunking wasn't allowed. Held balls used to result in a jump ball between the players involved, etc, etc.

So watching the replay of the 2003 game the other night I got to thinking of the game's evolution and how it's contributing to our current woes.

If you, can, take a look at the way we played the zone that night. It flowed as a unit from side to side, and made the necessary slides, but often left an empty corner. And that's because Kansas wasn't looking primarily for a three. They were looking to go inside and that's pretty much how most teams played us back then.

And it worked because most teams had one maybe two outside shooters at best, You could adjust the zone and mark a Chris Mullins from St Johns or Seaton Hall's Andrew Gaze. They'd get their twenty but you could still beat them. And sometimes they've have a bad night. But not anymore. One guy may be off but there's others who aren't. The three point shot is more than here to stay and it's killing us.

It's easy to say the zone worked better against Wake, but they really only had one good shooter. And it was still too damn close at the end. It will be interesting to see how it works on Wednesday. Maybe, if we advance we'll see man against a team with better shooters. I believe we have to

And one last observation. The Zone isn't the only problem. Looking at the Kansas game, we had four players who were averaging in double figures plus Pace and Edlin who could score. Even last year we four. This year we only have three and teams know it. We are constantly playing three against five. Every trip down we're only looking for those three. It's not enough.

Taylor came in with a rep as being another Buddy. Bell boasted he was going to break the three point record. I think they both can knock them down. I know it'll never happen but I'd love to see them on the floor with the other three and bombs away. It's the new game. At this point why the hell not.

Apologies for the length. I plead my age

 

[OrangeFoo]

Great post... great observations.

 

[GooseMutt]

I've been watching Syracuse Basketball since 1943. Yes, I'm that old. Now that longevity gives me no claim to better knowledge of the game than any who post her, but I have witnessed a lot of evolution along the way. I've seen rules disappear. Hand-checking used to be a foul. There was a time dunking wasn't allowed. Held balls used to result in a jump ball between the players involved, etc, etc.

So watching the replay of the 2003 game the other night I got to thinking of the game's evolution and how it's contributing to our current woes.

If you, can, take a look at the way we played the zone that night. It flowed as a unit from side to side, and made the necessary slides, but often left an empty corner. And that's because Kansas wasn't looking primarily for a three. They were looking to go inside and that's pretty much how most teams played us back then.

And it worked because most teams had one maybe two outside shooters at best, You could adjust the zone and mark a Chris Mullins from St Johns or Seaton Hall's Andrew Gaze. They'd get their twenty but you could still beat them. And sometimes they've have a bad night. But not anymore. One guy may be off but there's others who aren't. The three point shot is more than here to stay and it's killing us.

It's easy to say the zone worked better against Wake, but they really only had one good shooter. And it was still too damn close at the end. It will be interesting to see how it works on Wednesday. Maybe, if we advance we'll see man against a team with better shooters. I believe we have to

And one last observation. The Zone isn't the only problem. Looking at the Kansas game, we had four players who were averaging in double figures plus Pace and Edlin who could score. Even last year we four. This year we only have three and teams know it. We are constantly playing three against five. Every trip down we're only looking for those three. It's not enough.

Taylor came in with a rep as being another Buddy. Bell boasted he was going to break the three point record. I think they both can knock them down. I know it'll never happen but I'd love to see them on the floor with the other three and bombs away. It's the new game. At this point why the hell not.

Apologies for the length. I plead my age

Great points. Total response for old guard. No offense

 

[GooseMutt]

Great points. Total response for old guard. No offense

Respect

 

[SoBristol]

There is no silver bullet for this team. If Jesse can score inside in bunches (which is a challenge against bigger defenders) we can compete. Otherwise - the ingredients aren’t there.

 

[OrangePA]

I've been watching Syracuse Basketball since 1943. Yes, I'm that old. Now that longevity gives me no claim to better knowledge of the game than any who post her, but I have witnessed a lot of evolution along the way. I've seen rules disappear. Hand-checking used to be a foul. There was a time dunking wasn't allowed. Held balls used to result in a jump ball between the players involved, etc, etc.

So watching the replay of the 2003 game the other night I got to thinking of the game's evolution and how it's contributing to our current woes.

If you, can, take a look at the way we played the zone that night. It flowed as a unit from side to side, and made the necessary slides, but often left an empty corner. And that's because Kansas wasn't looking primarily for a three. They were looking to go inside and that's pretty much how most teams played us back then.

And it worked because most teams had one maybe two outside shooters at best, You could adjust the zone and mark a Chris Mullins from St Johns or Seaton Hall's Andrew Gaze. They'd get their twenty but you could still beat them. And sometimes they've have a bad night. But not anymore. One guy may be off but there's others who aren't. The three point shot is more than here to stay and it's killing us.

It's easy to say the zone worked better against Wake, but they really only had one good shooter. And it was still too damn close at the end. It will be interesting to see how it works on Wednesday. Maybe, if we advance we'll see man against a team with better shooters. I believe we have to

And one last observation. The Zone isn't the only problem. Looking at the Kansas game, we had four players who were averaging in double figures plus Pace and Edlin who could score. Even last year we four. This year we only have three and teams know it. We are constantly playing three against five. Every trip down we're only looking for those three. It's not enough.

Taylor came in with a rep as being another Buddy. Bell boasted he was going to break the three point record. I think they both can knock them down. I know it'll never happen but I'd love to see them on the floor with the other three and bombs away. It's the new game. At this point why the hell not.

Apologies for the length. I plead my age

In 2003 we had Carmelo Anthony - the best player in college BB that year - Gerry McNamara and Billy Edelin as frosh and Hakeem Warrick as a soph.

And of course we had a bunch of other very good players.

It was and remains all about talent.

 

[Chip]

In 2003 we had Carmelo Anthony - the best player in college BB that year - Gerry McNamara and Billy Edelin as frosh and Hakeem Warrick as a soph.

And of course we had a bunch of other very good players.

It was and remains all about talent.

Teams couldn't go on a run against us because of Carmelo. To this day I've never seen anyone who can so consistently finish. He was the perfect offensive player for Boeheim.

Gerry having such a hot hand to start that championship game was gravy.

Overlooked in everything was Jeremy McNeil. Without him, we never come back in that Oklahoma State game when we were left for dead early. One of the few times that even Carmelo couldn't stop the bleeding.

 

[Millhouse]

Teams couldn't go on a run against us because of Carmelo. To this day I've never seen anyone who can so consistently finish. He was the perfect offensive player for Boeheim.

Gerry having such a hot hand to start that championship game was gravy.

Overlooked in everything was Jeremy McNeil. Without him, we never come back in that Oklahoma State game when we were left for dead early. One of the few times that even Carmelo couldn't stop the bleeding.

It's crazy how a guy that big could jump so explosively

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

In 2003 we had Carmelo Anthony - the best player in college BB that year - Gerry McNamara and Billy Edelin as frosh and Hakeem Warrick as a soph.

And of course we had a bunch of other very good players.

It was and remains all about talent.

When Kueth and Josh are afterthoughts, you know your team is deep. Each guy had the ability to take advantage of matchups, which made us so hard to guard.

 

[OrangeDW]

I've been watching Syracuse Basketball since 1943. Yes, I'm that old. Now that longevity gives me no claim to better knowledge of the game than any who post her, but I have witnessed a lot of evolution along the way. I've seen rules disappear. Hand-checking used to be a foul. There was a time dunking wasn't allowed. Held balls used to result in a jump ball between the players involved, etc, etc.

So watching the replay of the 2003 game the other night I got to thinking of the game's evolution and how it's contributing to our current woes.

If you, can, take a look at the way we played the zone that night. It flowed as a unit from side to side, and made the necessary slides, but often left an empty corner. And that's because Kansas wasn't looking primarily for a three. They were looking to go inside and that's pretty much how most teams played us back then.

And it worked because most teams had one maybe two outside shooters at best, You could adjust the zone and mark a Chris Mullins from St Johns or Seaton Hall's Andrew Gaze. They'd get their twenty but you could still beat them. And sometimes they've have a bad night. But not anymore. One guy may be off but there's others who aren't. The three point shot is more than here to stay and it's killing us.

It's easy to say the zone worked better against Wake, but they really only had one good shooter. And it was still too damn close at the end. It will be interesting to see how it works on Wednesday. Maybe, if we advance we'll see man against a team with better shooters. I believe we have to

And one last observation. The Zone isn't the only problem. Looking at the Kansas game, we had four players who were averaging in double figures plus Pace and Edlin who could score. Even last year we four. This year we only have three and teams know it. We are constantly playing three against five. Every trip down we're only looking for those three. It's not enough.

Taylor came in with a rep as being another Buddy. Bell boasted he was going to break the three point record. I think they both can knock them down. I know it'll never happen but I'd love to see them on the floor with the other three and bombs away. It's the new game. At this point why the hell not.

Apologies for the length. I plead my age

Looking at Kansas’s stats, they had 1 shooter in their lineup in Kirk Heinrich, and 1 shooter off the bench in Michael Lee. Their starting 2 and 3(Langford and Miles) both shot 28% from 3 on the year and made 0.6 per game.

The game is so different.

 

[Chip]

It's crazy how a guy that big could jump so explosively

Assume you mean McNeil. Nothing about him said shot blocker. Except all the blocked and altered shots.

Especially in that Oklahoma State game. 5 on 1? No problem. It was like Patrick Roy or Dominick Hasek in their primes.

 

[Toga]

I've been watching Syracuse Basketball since 1943. Yes, I'm that old. Now that longevity gives me no claim to better knowledge of the game than any who post her, but I have witnessed a lot of evolution along the way. I've seen rules disappear. Hand-checking used to be a foul. There was a time dunking wasn't allowed. Held balls used to result in a jump ball between the players involved, etc, etc.

So watching the replay of the 2003 game the other night I got to thinking of the game's evolution and how it's contributing to our current woes.

If you, can, take a look at the way we played the zone that night. It flowed as a unit from side to side, and made the necessary slides, but often left an empty corner. And that's because Kansas wasn't looking primarily for a three. They were looking to go inside and that's pretty much how most teams played us back then.

And it worked because most teams had one maybe two outside shooters at best, You could adjust the zone and mark a Chris Mullins from St Johns or Seaton Hall's Andrew Gaze. They'd get their twenty but you could still beat them. And sometimes they've have a bad night. But not anymore. One guy may be off but there's others who aren't. The three point shot is more than here to stay and it's killing us.

It's easy to say the zone worked better against Wake, but they really only had one good shooter. And it was still too damn close at the end. It will be interesting to see how it works on Wednesday. Maybe, if we advance we'll see man against a team with better shooters. I believe we have to

And one last observation. The Zone isn't the only problem. Looking at the Kansas game, we had four players who were averaging in double figures plus Pace and Edlin who could score. Even last year we four. This year we only have three and teams know it. We are constantly playing three against five. Every trip down we're only looking for those three. It's not enough.

Taylor came in with a rep as being another Buddy. Bell boasted he was going to break the three point record. I think they both can knock them down. I know it'll never happen but I'd love to see them on the floor with the other three and bombs away. It's the new game. At this point why the hell not.

Apologies for the length. I plead my age

 

[Orangezoo]

In 2003 we had Carmelo Anthony - the best player in college BB that year - Gerry McNamara and Billy Edelin as frosh and Hakeem Warrick as a soph.

And of course we had a bunch of other very good players.

It was and remains all about talent.

We know - you hate the analytics that show the game has changed and there can be no other opinion than its the players. It's your way or the highway.

The OP is spot on around shot preference- it's a good take on articulating the eye test element of what the numbers clearly back up.

 

[OrangePA]

We know - you hate the analytics that show the game has changed and there can be no other opinion than its the players. It's your way or the highway.

The OP is spot on around shot preference- it's a good take on articulating the eye test element of what the numbers clearly back up.

McNamara had six threes in the first half against KS.

 

[Orangezoo]

McNamara had six threes in the first half against KS.

Lol...

 

[VA2NY]

I've been watching Syracuse Basketball since 1943. Yes, I'm that old. Now that longevity gives me no claim to better knowledge of the game than any who post her, but I have witnessed a lot of evolution along the way. I've seen rules disappear. Hand-checking used to be a foul. There was a time dunking wasn't allowed. Held balls used to result in a jump ball between the players involved, etc, etc.

So watching the replay of the 2003 game the other night I got to thinking of the game's evolution and how it's contributing to our current woes.

If you, can, take a look at the way we played the zone that night. It flowed as a unit from side to side, and made the necessary slides, but often left an empty corner. And that's because Kansas wasn't looking primarily for a three. They were looking to go inside and that's pretty much how most teams played us back then.

And it worked because most teams had one maybe two outside shooters at best, You could adjust the zone and mark a Chris Mullins from St Johns or Seaton Hall's Andrew Gaze. They'd get their twenty but you could still beat them. And sometimes they've have a bad night. But not anymore. One guy may be off but there's others who aren't. The three point shot is more than here to stay and it's killing us.

It's easy to say the zone worked better against Wake, but they really only had one good shooter. And it was still too damn close at the end. It will be interesting to see how it works on Wednesday. Maybe, if we advance we'll see man against a team with better shooters. I believe we have to

And one last observation. The Zone isn't the only problem. Looking at the Kansas game, we had four players who were averaging in double figures plus Pace and Edlin who could score. Even last year we four. This year we only have three and teams know it. We are constantly playing three against five. Every trip down we're only looking for those three. It's not enough.

Taylor came in with a rep as being another Buddy. Bell boasted he was going to break the three point record. I think they both can knock them down. I know it'll never happen but I'd love to see them on the floor with the other three and bombs away. It's the new game. At this point why the hell not.

Apologies for the length. I plead my age

It appears part of the issue with having those two on the court at the same time was JB viewed it as requiring Joe to come off. Disagree with that, but even if it did, Joe shouldn’t have been on the court 35-40 min anyway. I think this would have been a lethal combination and on par with the way the game has transformed to a three point shooting contest on most nights. As it turns out I don’t think we ever got to see the full potential of Bell or Taylor individually much less in combination

 

[MSOrange]

In 2003 we had Carmelo Anthony - the best player in college BB that year - Gerry McNamara and Billy Edelin as frosh and Hakeem Warrick as a soph.

And of course we had a bunch of other very good players.

It was and remains all about talent.

It probably wouldn't be a waste of your time to read this and more articles like this, so you can better understand what you are watching. Because if you don't think the game has changed, I don't know what to tell you.

How the 'Idiots Who Believe' in the Analytics Movement Have Forever Changed Basketball | The Analyst

Thanks in part to data's influence and advanced analytics, basketball is now a game that wouldn't have been recognizable 50 years ago.

theanalyst.com

 

[Orangezoo]

It probably wouldn't be a waste of your time to read this and more articles like this, so you can better understand what you are watching. Because if you don't think the game has changed, I don't know what to tell you.

How the 'Idiots Who Believe' in the Analytics Movement Have Forever Changed Basketball | The Analyst

Thanks in part to data's influence and advanced analytics, basketball is now a game that wouldn't have been recognizable 50 years ago.

theanalyst.com

This feels like the Dwight vs the computer episode...

 

[swish7]

Great post, spot on, and congrats on the longevity. That is a lot of Cardiac Cuse.