The Logical Fallacy Some Fans Have Embraced To Justify Their Criticism Of Boeheim | Page 3 | Syracusefan.com

The Logical Fallacy Some Fans Have Embraced To Justify Their Criticism Of Boeheim

No body knows for sure, including JB. But IMO this is really pretty simple. Lets look at the game logs for Jesse Edwards...

Untitled.png


Jesse did not play more than 6 minutes in any of the first 10 games, other than the Miami game in a huge blowout.

His first game with more than 6 minutes (other than Miami game) was against Georgia Tech, with 23 minutes.

He then played double digit minutes in 4 of the last 7 games of the season.

So back to this Georgia Tech game where Jesse's minutes changed drastically... Was THAT the exact time that JB decided that Jesse was "ready?" Or was it because of the 5 fouls Marek accumulated and JB was forced to play Jesse?

Pretty obvious answer here.
 
The only real problem I have with the appeal to authority, (in fact, you might even refer to that as a fallacy!) coach always knows best argument is there are two coaches in every game. No matter what, one of them is going to lose. So the appeal to authority only goes so far.

Certainly the head coach is going to be privy to information the fan isn't regarding any number of issues relating to the team. But I also kinda think its wrong to assume they are infallible.
 
I've never once called JB an idiot or anything close to it. I'm not aware of anyone else here calling him that either. It seems like you're making a hasty generalization which is #7 on the list of the 15 most common logical fallacies.

"A hasty generalization is a general statement without sufficient evidence to support it. A hasty generalization is made out of a rush to have a conclusion, leading the arguer to commit some sort of illicit assumption, stereotyping, unwarranted conclusion, overstatement, or exaggeration."
Hey, if you wanna play rhetorical games with me, I'm all for it. But please note that in the very post you responded to, what you decried as a 'hasty generalization' was actually my attempt to clarify that my use of the word "idiot" was narrowly applied to criticisms of Boeheim's rotation decisions.

Which you immediately ignored...cuz why?
 
So do you count yourself among those who feel that JB is the luckiest coach on earth, who in spite of his flaws somehow continues to find players who can coach themselves into amazing post-season performances?
Pro tip: Let your primary argument do the talking. This stuff isn’t helping your case.
 
The only real problem I have with the appeal to authority, (in fact, you might even refer to that as a fallacy!) coach always knows best argument is there are two coaches in every game. No matter what, one of them is going to lose. So the appeal to authority only goes so far.

Certainly the head coach is going to be privy to information the fan isn't regarding any number of issues relating to the team. But I also kinda think its wrong to assume they are infallible.
Well yeah, it's an appeal to authority which in and of itself does not prove anything, but when you're comparing evaluations of coaching decisions with imperfect knowledge, it offers significantly more weight to one 'guess' over another 'guess' which has neither authority nor logic to defend it.
 
Pro tip: Let your primary argument do the talking. This stuff isn’t helping your case.
Ultimately, all of this is all a waste of time, but I think it's important to for those who invest a lot of energy in promoting ridiculous and insulting insinuations re: Jim Boeheim should contend with some spirited pushback.
 
Ultimately, all of this is all a waste of time, but I think it's important to for those who invest a lot of energy in promoting ridiculous and insulting insinuations re: Jim Boeheim should contend with some spirited pushback.
I’m all for the pushback. You might be right in that some people think JB’s an idiot. No one has actually expressed that in a post, though, especially those participating in this thread.

At the end of the day, we all bleed orange!
 
No body knows for sure, including JB. But IMO this is really pretty simple. Lets look at the game logs for Jesse Edwards...

View attachment 198695

Jesse did not play more than 6 minutes in any of the first 10 games, other than the Miami game in a huge blowout.

His first game with more than 6 minutes (other than Miami game) was against Georgia Tech, with 23 minutes.

He then played double digit minutes in 4 of the last 7 games of the season.

So back to this Georgia Tech game where Jesse's minutes changed drastically... Was THAT the exact time that JB decided that Jesse was "ready?" Or was it because of the 5 fouls Marek accumulated and JB was forced to play Jesse?

Pretty obvious answer here.
Why can’t that be the moment he proved himself once and for all? If we wasn’t showing that in practice, then he wasn’t earning playing time.

JB still said after that game and UNC that Edwards wasn’t ready. Meaning not 100% ready. As I alluded to earlier, he still needs to bring it every night. He can’t have another performance like WVU.
 
Why can’t that be the moment he proved himself once and for all? If we wasn’t showing that in practice, then he wasn’t earning playing time.

JB still said after that game and UNC that Edwards wasn’t ready. Meaning not 100% ready. As I alluded to earlier, he still needs to bring it every night. He can’t have another performance like WVU.
because he already did that in the Miami game and, more importantly, this team needed a center. Any center.

i said as much after the Miami game that we knew he would have crummy games.

 
Just stop. It is getting past the point of ridiculous with you. it is not just a coincidence that we are a better team now after starting playing Braswell and Edwards more. They didn't all of a sudden get it. Many of us wanted those guys to play and when we weren't playing them, we were getting routed by average at best teams. Now, they are playing and we are winning and you say, see, JB knew they weren't ready but now they are. How do you know that if he had played those guys earlier, we wouldn't have started winning earlier? You don't. All we do know is that now that they are playing, as many of us have pleaded to have happen, we are winning. That and Buddy is hitting every shot possible. Those guys weren't playing and we were losing. They are playing and now we are winning. And JB was right not to play them?
You are absolutely right buddy Jim beohiem is a great coach. One of the greatest but he is not God, he is wrong from time to time and I think Kadary, Jesse should be and have played more but yea this is just my opinion.
This is getting a little crazy. From time to time so we are all wrong because We are human beings and we are all wrong from the time to time. Sorry for being so dramatic but it seemed like it called for it
 
You are absolutely right buddy Jim beohiem is a great coach. One of the greatest but he is not God, he is wrong from time to time and I think Kadary, Jesse should be and have played more but yea this is just my opinion.
This is getting a little crazy. From time to time so we are all wrong because We are human beings and we are all wrong from the time to time. Sorry for being so dramatic but it seemed like it called for it
100% exactly the point
 
that’s certainly a fair assessment with Jesse and Bras...my pushback is the idea that “JB plays to win every game” = “players aren’t ready”
We all know JB says things. He’s never been 100% transparent, not even close. Remember when he said he doesn’t take people out for making a mistake? Obviously that isn’t true.

So when he says players aren’t ready, I think he’s giving the simplest answer possible. He usually doesn’t go into detail why they aren’t ready or how close they are to being ready. And it could be about ability or conditioning or something else. It could even be about protecting the egos of the guys playing ahead of them (i.e. Griffin and Girard).
 
because he already did that in the Miami game and, more importantly, this team needed a center. Any center.

i said as much after the Miami game that we knew he would have crummy games.

The Edwards from the Miami game still wasn’t at the level of the Edwards from Tech and UNC. Goes back to what I said about complacency. Of course the players aren’t robots. There’s a psychology to coaching that we tend to overlook. JB’s approach is definitely old school in that regard, which understandably rubs some fans (and obviously players) the wrong way.
 
7 years is a trend. Syracuse looking like 1989 East Tennessee State, getting dunked on over and over again against Georgia Tech. Yeah. It looked abysmal. Is there any wonder that frustration peaked on that day?

Frankly, the turnaround is all the more shocking considering what preceded it.

I still contend that there ought to be a short list in the ADs “Rolodex,” once the succession plan needs to be enacted. It’s not like the question is “if” it will have to be enacted.

This 6-game run from Georgia Tech to the Sweet 16 will calm the masses, but it doesn’t change the fact that results matter. And the regular season results have been consistently sub-par for this program for some time.

Fortunately, the flip side is just as true. We’re two win from the Final Four. Hoping for a similar year end result next year, but as a protected seed for a welcome, and dare I say, expected, change.
 
I generally don't care too much either way about this argument. (I have no idea who really deserves to play, and whatever I think does not matter one iota, anyway.) But I have to take issue with the highlighted statement above, because I've seen many similar statements lately.

In the great debate about whether JB was right or wrong to have a shorter rotation in December/January, can't we all agree on this: Kadary got minutes all year long! I know that people were advocating for Kadary to play more, or to flip-flop the starting role and/or minutes played with Joe... but it's not fair to say that Buddy and/or Joe had multiple 3-for-14 outings while Kadary sat on the bench. Which games are you referring to with this claim?
just from the first 10 games - you can go through the rest of the boxscores if you choose -

Joe had games of 2 - 14, 3 - 11, 1-8 , 3 -11 in between 32 and 35 MPG.

Buddy had games of 1 - 12 and 3 -12 in 35 and 32 minutes respectively, also remember Buddy missed several of those early games due to Covid so his two games were out of only 6 or 7.

I did not include a couple of Joe clunkers where Buddy sat because Kadary got his minutes in those games.
 
Why can’t that be the moment he proved himself once and for all? If we wasn’t showing that in practice, then he wasn’t earning playing time.

JB still said after that game and UNC that Edwards wasn’t ready. Meaning not 100% ready. As I alluded to earlier, he still needs to bring it every night. He can’t have another performance like WVU.

If that was the moment he proved himself to JB once and for all, would he have had the opportunity if Marek didnt foul out? Or would the team be watching the tournament from home right now?
 
just from the first 10 games - you can go through the rest of the boxscores if you choose -

Joe had games of 2 - 14, 3 - 11, 1-8 , 3 -11 in between 32 and 35 MPG.

Buddy had games of 1 - 12 and 3 -12 in 35 and 32 minutes respectively, also remember Buddy missed several of those early games due to Covid so his two games were out of only 6 or 7.

I did not include a couple of Joe clunkers where Buddy sat because Kadary got his minutes in those games.
Ok, I'll bite. Let's dig in and check your claim:
  • Joe's 2-for-14 game that you referenced was the very first game of the season (vs Rider), which came off of a long Covid pause. If your argument is that JB should have benched Joe in game #1 for a true freshman that hadn't really had a ton of practice time, that's fine, I guess. (It should also be noted that Joe hit two huge jumpers late to help us win that game.)
  • Joe's first 3-for-11 game that you referenced was the 2nd game of the season (vs Niagara). Kadary played 35 minutes in that game. (And remember, your original contention was that "Kadary sat" when Joe and Buddy had these horrible games... that obviously does not apply in this instance.)
  • Joe's 1-for-8 game that you referenced was the 4th game of the season (at Rutgers). Kadary played 37 minutes in that game. (Another example that runs counter to your original statement that "Kadary sat".)
  • Joe's second 3-for-11 game that you referenced was the 8th game of the season (vs Pitt). Kadary played 19 minutes in that game, including 10 straight minutes in the 2nd half. (Another game where it's incorrect to say that "Kadary sat".)
  • And I couldn't help but notice that you excluded Joe's 1-for-6 performance in game #7 against Buffalo. I'm guessing you arbitrarily excluded that poor performance by Joe because Kadary played 32 minutes in that game, versus only 16 for Joe? Or did you arbitrarily exclude that game for a different reason?
  • Buddy's 1-for-12 performance was against Northeastern, and Kadary actually played the final 13:35 uninterrupted in a tight game (and 18 minutes total). If you go back and re-watch that game, you'll actually see that it was one of the few times this season that JB played Joe, Buddy and Kadary together for big minutes. (Griffin was the odd man out that game, with 0 points scored and 3 turnovers in 24 horrific minutes.)
  • Buddy's 3-for-12 performance is the same Pitt game (8th game of the season) that I already referenced above. Kadary did not sit.

Thank you for helping me disprove the narrative that "Kadary sat" while Joe and/or Buddy stunk up the court once and for all! I appreciate you!
 
This is such a chicken and the egg argument. The truth is, we’ll never know for sure either way.

Even with the results we’re seeing now, we don’t have all of the facts at our disposal. We don’t know the full extent of COVID affecting certain players, as upperdeck pointed out. We don’t know if playing Edwards earlier would have made him complacent, rather than continuing to work hard to get where he is now. (And he’s still very much a work in progress. He did not play well against WVU.) We don’t know how fragile Girard’s psyche is. (We do know that both Girard and Richmond need to play and play well for this team to reach its ceiling.) We don’t know if there were any lingering effects with Braswell’s injury.

And players do start to get it as the season goes along. There have been at least 44 articles written since Sunday stating just that. That goes for both the starters and reserves. Our starting five played their best defense of the year in the first half against WVU.

Finally, if it’s just a matter of JB stubborn, then he wouldn’t have started playing these guys more at all. There was a reason for it, and I highly doubt it was because someone got to him. Not Wildhack, not Red, not Guttierez, not Pat from Syracuse, not Juli, not Etan, not Jesse’s mom, not Bilas, not even Buddy. He made the decision on his own and it wasn’t for job security.

Or it could have been foul trouble.
 
A month or so ago, those fans who've always felt somehow superior to Jim Boeheim stirred each other into a fevered chorus of criticism of Boeheim over the struggles this year's team was having early on. To them, Boeheim's retirement could not come soon enough. They felt the problem was obvious: Jim Boeheim couldn't see the potential in Kadary Richmond, Jesse Edwards, and Robert Braswell. He was making a serious coaching mistake by not giving his best players the lion's share of the available PT (as they saw it from their living rooms).

Now that the season has turned around, these same critics are now proclaiming that because the increased effective participation of these key reserves in recent weeks has coincided with the impressive string of victories the team has pulled off, is definitive proof that they were right and Boeheim was wrong a month ago when they were clamoring for KR, JE, and RB to be playing more.

It's a logical fallacy.

It presumes that Boeheim was not aware of the contributions that those three players could make by the end of the season, but there is zero evidence that this is true. Indeed, Boeheim was the first to identify their potential, long before any fans were aware, but he was also aware of the mistakes they were making in practice, the kind that could cause his team to lose games with unforced turnovers and/or missed opportunities.

At no time did Boeheim say anything to suggest that he didn't believe these guys would eventually be able to help the team later in the season. He only said that he didn't think they were ready to play more...yet. So THE difference of opinion between Jim Boeheim and his harshest fan critics was only ever over when these players should be getting more minutes in games. Now...or later? The fans said now, Boeheim said later.

Boeheim said later for a reason. He's been coaching teams for decades, has seen them develop over the course of a season, correcting their mistakes, getting the newer players to a level of familiarity with The Plan to where they can come into games without putting victories in jeopardy with their errors. This is why--especially early in the season--Boeheim will ALWAYS go with more experienced players if/whenever a game is in doubt.

Let the record show that Boeheim did not play them more earlier as the fans said he should. He played them later. And we now know the outcome of Boeheim ignoring the advice of fans and stubbornly coaching his team his way. He did start to give these player more PT when he felt they might be ready to contribute, and not before. That his team has turned out to be a smashing success is a supreme tribute to Jim Boeheim's coaching genius, his ability to develop a team over the course of a season into a competitive tornado.

To those fans who are now trying to take credit for the team's current success, I say feel free to embrace whatever delusional rationalizations you wish, but understand that the coincidence of the team winning big end-of-season games and the greater participation of key reserves does NOT prove your case that they should have played more earlier.

Since Boeheim did not play them earlier, it is not logically possible to infer that doing so would have achieved anything. That experiment was not tried so it's not possible to declare it a success. But Boeheim's approach was tried and the results have been spectacular. He's made his case, but you're left with an unproven theory that is extraordinarily weak and unpersuasive, IMO.
Your first sentence is false, and the rest of the post suffers from a flawed foundation and as much bias as you are projecting onto the 'other side.'

And you ascribe omniscience to Boeheim in a contrived and desperate need to prove your flawed premise.

What you are describing for your own self-aggrandizement is not actually "logic."

You basically wrapped some junk in a pretty satin bow.
 
Why fight amongst ourselves?
The Orange are playing great** and the Final 4 is actually within sight.
Who woulda thunk it?
Whatever the coach did or didn't do...it's all working now.
And that's what matters.

Gotta deal with a great offensive rebounding team Saturday...

GO ORANGE!

**except for inbounding the basketball in the final minute
 
Just stop. It is getting past the point of ridiculous with you. it is not just a coincidence that we are a better team now after starting playing Braswell and Edwards more. They didn't all of a sudden get it. Many of us wanted those guys to play and when we weren't playing them, we were getting routed by average at best teams. Now, they are playing and we are winning and you say, see, JB knew they weren't ready but now they are. How do you know that if he had played those guys earlier, we wouldn't have started winning earlier? You don't. All we do know is that now that they are playing, as many of us have pleaded to have happen, we are winning. That and Buddy is hitting every shot possible. Those guys weren't playing and we were losing. They are playing and now we are winning. And JB was right not to play them?
I think there are plenty of times where you ”just” get. You learn the aggression you need, that a certain move works and through a combination of that and more it comes together. especially youg platers
 
Ok, I'll bite. Let's dig in and check your claim:
  • Joe's 2-for-14 game that you referenced was the very first game of the season (vs Rider), which came off of a long Covid pause. If your argument is that JB should have benched Joe in game #1 for a true freshman that hadn't really had a ton of practice time, that's fine, I guess. (It should also be noted that Joe hit two huge jumpers late to help us win that game.)
  • Joe's first 3-for-11 game that you referenced was the 2nd game of the season (vs Niagara). Kadary played 35 minutes in that game. (And remember, your original contention was that "Kadary sat" when Joe and Buddy had these horrible games... that obviously does not apply in this instance.)
  • Joe's 1-for-8 game that you referenced was the 4th game of the season (at Rutgers). Kadary played 37 minutes in that game. (Another example that runs counter to your original statement that "Kadary sat".)
  • Joe's second 3-for-11 game that you referenced was the 8th game of the season (vs Pitt). Kadary played 19 minutes in that game, including 10 straight minutes in the 2nd half. (Another game where it's incorrect to say that "Kadary sat".)
  • And I couldn't help but notice that you excluded Joe's 1-for-6 performance in game #7 against Buffalo. I'm guessing you arbitrarily excluded that poor performance by Joe because Kadary played 32 minutes in that game, versus only 16 for Joe? Or did you arbitrarily exclude that game for a different reason?
  • Buddy's 1-for-12 performance was against Northeastern, and Kadary actually played the final 13:35 uninterrupted in a tight game (and 18 minutes total). If you go back and re-watch that game, you'll actually see that it was one of the few times this season that JB played Joe, Buddy and Kadary together for big minutes. (Griffin was the odd man out that game, with 0 points scored and 3 turnovers in 24 horrific minutes.)
  • Buddy's 3-for-12 performance is the same Pitt game (8th game of the season) that I already referenced above. Kadary did not sit.

Thank you for helping me disprove the narrative that "Kadary sat" while Joe and/or Buddy stunk up the court once and for all! I appreciate you!
Yes, I will agree that Kadary did get minutes in some of those games, mostly because Buddy was out w COVID. However, you are limiting your perspective. In some of those tough outings for Joe, he should have had still been sat. I will not get into the issue of why we only have three serviceable "pure" guards on the roster. Alan could certainly have played some backcourt minutes with either Bras, Newton (who started the season strong), or one of the centers getting more frontcourt time. Actually, Newton in particular looked good in a couple of early outings. So the bottom line is that I buy that you have successfully kicked the can down the road, but not that one of the youngsters should not have gotten some run when starters are not playing well.
 
No body knows for sure, including JB. But IMO this is really pretty simple. Lets look at the game logs for Jesse Edwards...

View attachment 198695

Jesse did not play more than 6 minutes in any of the first 10 games, other than the Miami game in a huge blowout.

His first game with more than 6 minutes (other than Miami game) was against Georgia Tech, with 23 minutes.

He then played double digit minutes in 4 of the last 7 games of the season.

So back to this Georgia Tech game where Jesse's minutes changed drastically... Was THAT the exact time that JB decided that Jesse was "ready?" Or was it because of the 5 fouls Marek accumulated and JB was forced to play Jesse?

Pretty obvious answer here.
Just to make sure we’re all on the same page, Edwards didn’t only play 23 minutes against Miami because it was a blowout. He came in and played well (he also had a good game or two last season).

He was given opportunities in subsequent games, but did not play as well. Had he come into the UNC game and struggled, he would not have stayed on the court, as was the case against Clemson, UVA, and WVU.

Your argument is that he should have played more earlier, at the very least after Miami. He was given that chance, though, and he didn’t take advantage. That even led to some DNPs.

So again, I think we all agree that we always needed more from Edwards. Where we differ is what was required to get him there.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,617
Messages
4,715,788
Members
5,909
Latest member
jc824

Online statistics

Members online
332
Guests online
2,705
Total visitors
3,037


Top Bottom