To those that say recruiting has not fallen off...

[SUFan44]

I would think so. He looks to be in excellent shape and is sharp as a tack. He was spoiled by Hop who carried the load for him for at least the last 10 years. Hop was/is one of the most charismatic coaches you will ever meet. He is a world class recruiter whi lined them up for Jim. At this point Gmac Griff and Red dont seem to be in hops league. But back to your question i have no doubt JB can do it. The question is will he.

Have met Hop and know how gregarious he is. Really sad to see him leave. These other three guys aren’t even close. Need some new blood with new connections from outside SU (Troy Weaver/Rob Murphy). That, or you’re right - JB needs to man up and hit the trail hard. No excuse to not have a Top 40 player for four years running. Maybe Guerrier is that guy, who knows.

 

[kcsu]

Have met Hop and know how gregarious he is. Really sad to see him leave. These other three guys aren’t even close. Need some new blood with new connections from outside SU (Troy Weaver/Rob Murphy). That, or you’re right - JB needs to man up and hit the trail hard. No excuse to not have a Top 40 player for four years running. Maybe Guerrier is that guy, who knows.

I know. I give Gmac a hard time on here but he has the most juice of the three. Still isnt anywhere near Hops ability to connect as Hop is a special individual.
My guess is that Jim isn't going to put much road time in and he obviously isn't going to change his staff. At this point lets hope we can at a minimum recruit well enough to stay at our current level which isnt what we expect at Syracuse but is still pretty good.

 

[Newhouser]

3 more years and we pull the Band-Aid off and start a new era. JW will prove his worth at that time.

 

[slashsnake]

Been an SU fan all my life (28 years). Every year it seems like this team has a couple of average to good players, and the rest are mediocre. Year after year we see nothing but 6'10 189 lb string-beans who can't shoot take the floor, or some center who can't dunk and play aggressively.

There's no reason SU shouldn't get a couple of top 20 recruits every year with the history of our program. We're not Duke or UNC, but we should have better classes than an average mid major program.

 

[Cusefan0307]

We have the fifth best class in the ACC right now for next year. Virginia is below us and they were the last two years as well.

 

[TheCusian]

Do you think our recruting has been elite, or even good?

It’s def good, lol.

 

[MikeDamone]

We have the fifth best class in the ACC right now for next year. Virginia is below us and they were the last two years as well.

That didn't matter much last night

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Straight talk - we'll know recruiting has improved when we're putting 1st rounders in the NBA every year again.

 

[dasher]

Straight talk - we'll know recruiting has improved when we're putting 1st rounders in the NBA every year again.

have we gone just one draft since we didn't put a first rounder in?

 

[OttoinGrotto]

have we gone just one draft since we didn't put a first rounder in?

We'll go 2 in a row this draft, I'd imagine.

 

[dasher]

We'll go 2 in a row this draft, I'd imagine.

Time will tell.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Time will tell.

I guess we can count Baz.

 

[dasher]

I guess we can count Baz.

lol

 

[slashsnake]

We have the fifth best class in the ACC right now for next year. Virginia is below us and they were the last two years as well.

If you recruit a bunch of sharpshooters, you don't have to recruit as well to be successful. Boeheim doesn't even know what a sharpshooter is because we never have more than one, if any on a team.

 

[721Comstock]

If you recruit a bunch of sharpshooters, you don't have to recruit as well to be successful. Boeheim doesn't even know what a sharpshooter is because we never have more than one, if any on a team.

The Lydon, Uncle Drew, Gillon team would beg to differ with you. Shot over 40% from 3.
So would the 2010 team, with Wes, Andy, Triche, and Scoop. Ditto.

But, don't let the facts get in the way of your narrative now.

 

[slashsnake]

The Lydon, Uncle Drew, Gillon team would beg to differ with you. Shot over 40% from 3.
So would the 2010 team, with Wes, Andy, Triche, and Scoop. Ditto.

But, don't let the facts get in the way of your narrative now.

You point out two seasons over the last nine.

Don't take everything so literally. "Never" obviously doesn't mean every single year of Boeheim's coaching years... More like 98% of them.

 

[NKR1978]

You point out two seasons over the last nine.

Don't take everything so literally. "Never" obviously doesn't mean every single year of Boeheim's coaching years... More like 98% of them.

Maybe choose your words more carefully? I'm prone to exaggeration with friends who can tell I'm joking, but you lose that in a written context. We also have Buddy and Girard next year who I have a feeling will be tough to guard along with Hughes and maybe even a more improved MD.

 

[slashsnake]

People shooting less than 40% from 3 point range are not "sharp shooters."

Steph Curry is a sharp shooter. Trevor Cooney isn't. And even then I said "one" sharp shooter at the most.

33% and you're bringing that up as a point? 33% is garbage from long distance. When you attempt 100 shots, the player can only hit 33 of them... Not a good percentage. Sharp shooters are lethal threats to hit three point shots - not small threats to hit one.

Calculate the players who shoot over 40% and now add the total.

 

[721Comstock]

People shooting less than 40% from 3 point range are not "sharp shooters."

Steph Curry is a sharp shooter. Trevor Cooney isn't. And even then I said "one" sharp shooter at the most.

33% and you're bringing that up as a point? 33% is garbage from long distance. When you attempt 100 shots, the player can only hit 33 of them... Not a good percentage. Sharp shooters are lethal threats to hit three point shots - not small threats to hit one.

Calculate the players who shoot over 40% and now add the total.

You’re one of those ignorant people who chooses arbitrary baselines for their expectations, which are way out of line with reality.

You don’t need to shoot 40+% from 3 to be an effective 3pt shooter.

But, I’ve shown that we’ve had 2 TEAMS in the past 9 years that shot that %, each with multiple guys hitting at/over 40%.
But that’s way above average.
And not every team gets to be above average all the time - or else it would no longer be average.

If Steph Curry is your barometer for what it takes to be a sharpshooter from 3, then get used to disappointment.

Math - 33% from 3 is the same effective FG% as 50% from 2.
It’s hardly “garbage”.

Edited to add:
Who’s the best 3pt shooter in Syracuse history?
Who do you think of when you think big 3’?
Clutch 3’s?

GMac.

Who shot 34% & 33% his Jr & Sr years.

Also, of the Top 15 3pt % shooters in Syracuse history, 9 of them played in the past decade or so.

Which clearly proves JB isn’t recruiting any shooters.

 

[slashsnake]

There's a difference between a 3 point shooter and a sharp shooter. A 3 point shooter is a "maybe" the shot will go in if they shoot. A sharp shooter is "that ball will probably go in the hoop." Sharp shooters are players teams build a game plan around - and are often superstars, while people who shoot 33% from long range are just considered someone who can hit the occasional three point shot.

Let's get back on track of recruiting, though, and it would be nice if you posted without personal attacks.

 

[Bayside44]

There's a difference between a 3 point shooter and a sharp shooter. A 3 point shooter is a "maybe" the shot will go in if they shoot. A sharp shooter is "that ball will probably go in the hoop." Sharp shooters are players teams build a game plan around - and are often superstars, while people who shoot 33% from long range are just considered someone who can hit the occasional three point shot.

Let's get back on track of recruiting, though, and it would be nice if you posted without personal attacks.

But your post about the head coach not recognizing shooting talent was prescient. Got it.

 

[IthacaMatt]

I did a quick synopsis. Of course, my memory could be off on a few guys.

I count of the top 50 recruits that 17 were eventual regular starters, albeit some not too successful such as Kaleb Joseph and only 2 top 50 who were not starters, both named Jones.

Of the 24 non top 50, I counted 12 who started and 12 who did not.

So, considering we now are three years and counting without a single Top 50 recruit, it tells me that we are being forced to play some guys as starters who really are not starting level talent, so no mystery as to why our program has descended to mediocrity.

That's a good way to look at it.
Top 50 / 4 star guys usually wind up solid contributors, if not stars for us.

Guys outside the top 50 to 75 - 3 stars, are a 50/50 crap shoot. Some work out and some don't.
We can't bat 50/50 on recruits if we want to be top 4 in the ACC and at our historical level.

And we certainly couldn't afford to do both that and lose so many to transfer and too early exits who fail to make the NBA, like has happened so many times during the last several years.

 

[jmcclure33]

That's a good way to look at it.
Top 50 / 4 star guys usually wind up solid contributors, if not stars for us.

Guys outside the top 50 to 75 - 3 stars, are a 50/50 crap shoot. Some work out and some don't.
We can't bat 50/50 on recruits if we want to be top 4 in the ACC and at our historical level.

And we certainly couldn't afford to do both that and lose so many to transfer and too early exits who fail to make the NBA, like has happened so many times during the last several years.

Not sure why you keep saying guys outside the top 50 are 3 stars, they aren’t. Every single guy in the top 100, and most times even just outside of it, are all 4 stars.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Not sure why you keep saying guys outside the top 50 are 3 stars, they aren’t. Every single guy in the top 100, and most times even just outside of it, are all 4 stars.

Because not every rating places every guy in the same tier.
Go look at Verbal Commits, not just one particular recruiting site's list.
The aggregate ratings show you many guys as 3.7's or 3.3's who might otherwise make somebody's Top 100.

 

[jmcclure33]

Because not every rating places every guy in the same tier.
Go look at Verbal Commits, not just one particular recruiting site's list.
The aggregate ratings show you many guys as 3.7's or 3.3's who might otherwise make somebody's Top 100.

When I look at rankings, I generally look at the composite ranking on the site we’re not allowed to mention here. I can promise you that any kid that is in the composite top 100 for any given class is a 4 star. I have yet to see a 3 star in any top 100 list on a major site.