The Cooney Issue...

[kuethstheman]

I agree that the more teams realize he can put it on the floor, the more open he'll be for threes. He also needs more spot-up shooting opportunities. He's taking almost all of his shots coming off a sprint around picks, especially more recently. If we got it into the low post more often and they kicked it out to Cooney, he'd still be shooting over 50%. We're not giving his man enough temptation to leave him alone.

 

[orangefan13]

I think alot of cuse fans have no idea of how good a shooter Cooney is even after watching every game this season.

The last 2-3 games cooney has hit a leaning offbalenced nba 3, thats the real deal. Then he misses 2-5 spot ups the last few games rushing them jerking his release, on top of a few that have rimmed in and out.

 

[kuethstheman]

Yeah, u are right... we arent. My bad. I think Trevor is a good shooter. Not even close to great. The sign of a great shooter is making shots, not talking about how a handful of his last 33 three point shots (of which he made 6) were "close to going in."

He could be great, he really could, but he is far from it right now. And people with this view are called "haters" which is the funny part.

No. People who say he played terribly when he didn't are called "haters".

 

[Sgt Cuse]

so, only pre-game pressure counts as pressure? Up 19 with under 5 to play is "pressure" because of the name on the front of the jersey, but down 4 to SF-Brookly with under 4 to play is of little import, because there was no "pre-game pressure." Got it.

half way through the season, the second leading scorer on the #2 ranked team in the nation, a kid who ranks #34 among all players in division 1 in offensive efficiency and #13 in steal percentage, still needs to prove his development.

Let me ask you this: if 17 games is too small a sample size for Cooney, that would have to mean that your jury is still out on Ennis, too. Wonder why there are no screeds coming from you questioning him?

Yes, I am referring to the pressure of big games. A concern is that as the pressure of a bigger game comes, he gets tight. And right now it is possible he is being guided through a pressure increase from the in-conference status.

It's not a 17 game thing, it's a career thing. From his poor first game, the whole air ball thing, to poor first year, to poor NCAA FF game, to decreased in-conference performance this year. I think there is enough there to warrant the discussion of his development. Many before him, like Nichols and Rautins, have had excellent development.

I'm not sure what you are getting at with the Ennis comment. I haven't commented at all about him, I made a concious effort to stay out of those discussions. I have bit my tongue on the best ever bait. Why, wouldn't I say anything? Have you seen this mess.

 

[Cuse315Pat]

So where's all the feedback about the rest of the team? Sure Cooney had a bad stretch of 3's, but he makes more of his layups than any of our forwards and big men other than CJ. They blow dunks and layups every 3 or 4 possessions with minimal to no defense. We mine as well say we don't have any great players at the rim either. That's gonna hurt us more than Cooney missing some 3's. Christ, Cooney makes more of his dunks than anyone else.

 

[Oakland]

At this point the haters are just cherry picking data. Do the haters realize we aren't undefeated without Trevor, because his backup provides zero offense. I bet you Duke or UNC wish they had Trevor Cooney at the two, I'd like to hear from the skeptics who in the conference would be better at the two than him?

I don't think there are any Cooney haters on this board, but there does seem to be a Cooney posse that wants to stifle any criticism of him, especially, god forbid, a bad shooting game by him.

 

[Cusefan0307]

It looks like I have the skeptics annoyed. Once again I will ask the question of what 2 guard would you rather have in the conference, and two, answer why we don't have multiple threads about other players that may not perform well game to game?

 

[Doc5120]

It looks like I have the skeptics annoyed. Once again I will ask the question of what 2 guard would you rather have in the conference, and two, answer why we don't have multiple threads about other players that may not perform well game to game?

Don't hold your breath for any answers.

 

[moqui]

Yes, I am referring to the pressure of big games. A concern is that as the pressure of a bigger game comes, he gets tight.

Why is blue blood UNC a big game, but blue blood Indiana is not? Oh, I know why -because he played extremely well in the latter, and that blows your narrative

Many before him, like Nichols and Rautins, have had excellent development.
.

do you seriously maintain that Demetris Nichols' freshman to sophomore year development was better than has been Cooney's.

I'm not sure what you are getting at with the Ennis comment. I haven't commented at all about him, I made a concious effort to stay out of those discussions. I have bit my tongue on the best ever bait. Why, wouldn't I say anything? Have you seen this mess.

Cooney and Ennis have both had great years - it can be argued that the backcourt play has been the primary reason for the terrific start. Yet, you question the validity of Cooney's numbers, but not Ennis'. I could point out that Ennis had a substandard game vs. UNC, too - shot below 40%, missed both threes, even missed his only FT, his 4 turnovers was his season high. Yet you only question whether Cooney was effected by the "big pre-game pressure," not Tyler. Why is that?

Nobody is above criticism, and it is inarguable that Cooney did not shoot it well at all as a freshman, nor that he has had 2 really poor shooting games in his first four ACC games. I am all in favor of critically examining the team and its players. But in this case, to use those two games as a means to question the validity of the other 15, and to imply that he chokes in (your idiosyncratic definition of) big games strikes me as both wrong-headed and biased.

 

[TBCuse11]

I don't think there are any Cooney haters on this board, but here does seem to be a Cooney posse that wants to stifle any criticism of him, especially, god forbid, a bad shooting game by him.

This is very, very true.

 

[cuse1223]

Listen, I can't say that am not worried about Trevor's struggles from deep and how when he goes down generally the offense goes down. But he has shown us what he could do and not just for a few games but the entire non conference slate. While he is struggling from deep right now there is a reason we are only in January. Point is that he has proven that he can snap out of it at anytime and there is not much cause of concern yet. He's a hardworking kid and I'm not sure I would rather him be in anybody's hands but Gerry's. He will be fine and continue to stretch out the floor for the rest to make plays.

 

[Orangezoo]

Yeah, u are right... we arent. My bad. I think Trevor is a good shooter. Not even close to great. The sign of a great shooter is making shots, not talking about how a handful of his last 33 three point shots (of which he made 6) were "close to going in."

He could be great, he really could, but he is far from it right now. And people with this view are called "haters" which is the funny part.

great shooters have all been questioned at one time due to slumps, hitches in their shot or not shooting enough for too much. In many cases a great shooter is measured in a specific period of time and once you expand that time frame he is not such a great shooter. We often make that determination when that players career, whatever level he gets to, is over. So with that said I think its premature to doubt Trevor given he has done well against good non conf competition. The mark of a great shooter is also often one who knows when he simply can't get the shots he needs to be effective and has to alter his approach to get the spacing he needs to be effective. This is why seeing Trevor drive and do more to show he has that part of his game is going to help him re establish his shooting.

Finally - go back to UNC and trevor made two deep 2's. Great shooters have that ability. Ok shooters generally are uncomfortable outside a few areas on the court and within or outside certain distances. Trevor's game is much more than shooting and he should utilize that. But that does not detract from his shooting ability. I don't see opposite opinions as one being a hater. I simply disagree and think they are a bit short sighted which again is just my own opinion.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Listen, I can't say that am not worried about Trevor's struggles from deep and how when he goes down generally the offense goes down. But he has shown us what he could do and not just for a few games but the entire non conference slate. While he is struggling from deep right now there is a reason we are only in January. Point is that he has proven that he can snap out of it at anytime and there is not much cause of concern yet. He's a hardworking kid and I'm not sure I would rather him be in anybody's hands but Gerry's. He will be fine and continue to stretch out the floor for the rest to make plays.

I think we all need to remember this is his first year of playing big minutes. That takes a toll on kid's legs and that's where it all comes from for shooters. He will be fine. He's not missing by much. He will figure it out with the help of his coaches.

 

[Sgt Cuse]

Why is blue blood UNC a big game, but blue blood Indiana is not? Oh, I know why -because he played extremely well in the latter, and that blows your narrative

do you seriously maintain that Demetris Nichols' freshman to sophomore year development was better than has been Cooney's.

Cooney and Ennis have both had great years - it can be argued that the backcourt play has been the primary reason for the terrific start. Yet, you question the validity of Cooney's numbers, but not Ennis'. I could point out that Ennis had a substandard game vs. UNC, too - shot below 40%, missed both threes, even missed his only FT, his 4 turnovers was his season high. Yet you only question whether Cooney was effected by the "big pre-game pressure," not Tyler. Why is that?

Nobody is above criticism, and it is inarguable that Cooney did not shoot it well at all as a freshman, nor that he has had 2 really poor shooting games in his first four ACC games. I am all in favor of critically examining the team and its players. But in this case, to use those two games as a means to question the validity of the other 15, and to imply that he chokes in (your idiosyncratic definition of) big games strikes me as both wrong-headed and biased.

I am suggesting there may be a difference between in-conference and OOC in terms of pressure. It is not to imply that he hasn't done well in some previous games.

I didn't say Nichols had better development, quite the opposite. I was trying to soften the blow and suggest that TC does not have to be better than GMac to have experienced excellent development. That Nichols and Rautins had similar issues with pressure and overcame them.

I am not questioning the validity of TC's numbers. I have been watching and hoping for continued development. I just do not believe TC is a finished product at this point and will get better. I believe he will get better in-conference as the season progresses. I think TC just made a huge stride to that goal yesterday.

 

[RMH44]

This is very, very true.

Here's my main biotch: posters like you continuously equate poor shooting with playing a bad game. TC has had a couple of poor shooting games...this is an indisputable fact.

But contrary to the theme of the negative posters, TC contributes to the team's success in many other ways. In other words...a player can shoot poorly AND still play well. Unfortunately, the hoops IQ of many of the naysayers is barely above room temperature which leads them to impulsively post uneducated declarations.

Sadly, many of said posters further exacerbate their dilemma by refusing to acknowledge that maybe, just maybe their declarative statement(s) might have been too strong or even uninformed. This traps said posters in an accelerated spin cycle that leads to defensiveness and, ultimately, loss of credibility.

Sound familiar?

 

[DoctorBombay]

He could be great, he really could, but he is far from it right now. And people with this view are called "haters" which is the funny part.

I must've missed the part where posters are arguing that Cooney is unequivocally a GREAT shooter, no questions asked.
The bottom line is that other players have slumped, even CJ had a shaky 1st half yesterday. Therefore, why aren't there multiple call-out threads on CJ's turnovers, JG's often aimless drives to the basket, or Ennis' seeming inability to finish wide open layups? These have been mentioned every now & then, but they're not brought up like clockwork after every game?
No, this is mostly a question of attitude, on whether u choose to see the glass as half full or half empty.
There are those in our fanbase who look at Cooney and immediately criticize and dissect every hiccup, while often minimizing or ignoring the faults of others on the team.
When all one has to offer is negative feedback that can often be refuted by objective data, commonsense, or a more realistic perspective, then yes...they can be called out as haters.
This quote explains it perfectly:
"Critics are men who watch a battle from a high place, and then come down to shoot the survivors". - Ernest Hemingway -

 

[OrangeCuse44]

I was anti-cooney before I was pro-Cooney. I think we win with him and loose without him. I like him a lot and would shake his hand if he walked into my local pub in 2020 and chat a bit about that title game in 2014 and...

 

[SaltLakeOrange]

Yeah, u are right... we arent. My bad. I think Trevor is a good shooter. Not even close to great. The sign of a great shooter is making shots, not talking about how a handful of his last 33 three point shots (of which he made 6) were "close to going in." He could be great, he really could, but he is far from it right now. And people with this view are called "haters" which is the funny part.

How about we just agree that Trevor is a good basketball player and our best option at the 2...G isn't even close...

 

[moqui]

I stand by my OP, "shaky potatoes" when its go time. He needs to lay off the red bull, nervous wreck out there compared to the cool customer that Ennis is. I suppose they are a good match.

now that he was instrumental in the closest game of the season against the biggest name on the schedule, are you willing to give him some credit? I'm not asking you to hand out any superlatives or to call it "case closed," but wasn't Saturday the exact game and type of opponent that your original "shakey potatoes" assessment was based on? They don't get any bigger than Duke in front of 35K, and they don't get any closer than 2 pts in overtime, and he didn't look shakey at all, even when asked to handle the ball a lot more than usual.

 

[LennX6]

The Dude is the Starting Guard for the Undefeated #1 Team in the Country and its February.
That's really all it is and it's working.

 

[RF2044]

Trevor Cooney is laughing at this thread.

 

[br801]

now that he was instrumental in the closest game of the season against the biggest name on the schedule, are you willing to give him some credit? I'm not asking you to hand out any superlatives or to call it "case closed," but wasn't Saturday the exact game and type of opponent that your original "shakey potatoes" assessment was based on? They don't get any bigger than Duke in front of 35K, and they don't get any closer than 2 pts in overtime, and he didn't look shakey at all, even when asked to handle the ball a lot more than usual.

Yeah, but look at how he came back and played like crap against Notre Dame. Didn't you see those 2 turnovers last night, and that missed free throw? That stuff is unacceptable and nearly cost SU the game.

 

[SyracuseTD]

Just wait til next year when hes even more of a stud than he is now and we all wonder why we ever even questioned his ability. Cant believe we have him for 2 more years. Love the Coondaddy

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I'm cool saying it.

Because our fan base treats white players by a different standard.

Matt Roe and Craig Forth like this post.