Triche - What game

[MyMeloMyMan]

It's a board tradition to vilify very good four year players.

It's Triche's turn now. Last year it was Joseph. Once it was GMac. Next year it might be CJ.

Screw the program guys that are the foundation of SU's sustained excellence. Next year's model will certainly be better than this year's model, right?

I think its also pent up frustration from hearing all of the "this kid will likely only be here for two years, so we better enjoy them" with Triche before he stepped on campus. "His body is already NBA ready," etc. He was never going to live up to the hype. We were expecting a star and instead just got a good teammate/fairly solid "3rd best guy on the team" type of player. Program guys are awesome...but I think many of us expected Triche to be a star (fair or unfair as that is).

 

[kuethstheman]

I like BT but he's always had more than his share of What plays. Probability would tell you that a bunch will eventually happen in a single game. That's what I think happened last night. Probably won't happen again for a while.

 

[dollarbill44]

2nd half defense was piss-poor. Lots of guys out of position, flat-footed, reaching instead of moving - just flat out bad defense.

 

[billsin01]

It's a board tradition to vilify very good four year players.

It's Triche's turn now. Last year it was Joseph. Once it was GMac. Next year it might be CJ.

Screw the program guys that are the foundation of SU's sustained excellence. Next year's model will certainly be better than this year's model, right?

I agree this happened to the players you mentioned and I can't believe you're leaving out Scoop on that list. But I also think it's fair to criticize players. I mean, it's part of following this team -- not every group is the same and they all have strengths and weaknesses. The fact that you win 25 games doesn't mean you can't point out the flaws that will keep them from winning 30+ -- even if it's just your humble opinion as a non 900-game-winning basketball coach. Some people seem to personally not like players, which is strange.

But as for BT, I think the thing that makes him frustrating is he can do a little of everything but isn't particularly "great" at anything. I think of him as a really good foul shooter, but then you look and he's at 71% -- fine but hardly excellent. Obviously 45 FTs isn't a huge sample, but it's not insignificant.

He can handle the ball but he averages 3 TOs/game and can sometimes be hard to watch handling the ball. He can shoot but he's at under .320 from 3 and he clearly is not terribly confident in his jumper right now. He's at 43% overall, which is a perfect Triche number -- perfectly acceptable but hardly exceptional.

He's very solid defensively but he doesn't jump out at you the way Fab or rautins or MCW do (or did).

So while he's a really, really nice player and good piece of this puzzle. And while he's really unselfish and, I presume, a hard worker. And while he has stayed out of trouble and seems to be a model teammate. It can be frustrating to watch him play.

Is he a better player than a guy like Marius Janulis? Yes, but Janulis was easier to root for in some ways b/c you knew if he had to do anything other than hit an open jumper, you were in trouble.

So, after this long, rambling post, my basic point is that everyone should appreciate Triche as a key part of this program, but I don't think folks should be chastised for criticizing him. Particularly after a game in which, I think even BT would acknowledge, there were a lot of ugly moments.

 

[br801]

I agree this happened to the players you mentioned and I can't believe you're leaving out Scoop on that list. But I also think it's fair to criticize players. I mean, it's part of following this team -- not every group is the same and they all have strengths and weaknesses. The fact that you win 25 games doesn't mean you can't point out the flaws that will keep them from winning 30+ -- even if it's just your humble opinion as a non 900-game-winning basketball coach. Some people seem to personally not like players, which is strange.

But as for BT, I think the thing that makes him frustrating is he can do a little of everything but isn't particularly "great" at anything. I think of him as a really good foul shooter, but then you look and he's at 71% -- fine but hardly excellent. Obviously 45 FTs isn't a huge sample, but it's not insignificant.

He can handle the ball but he averages 3 TOs/game and can sometimes be hard to watch handling the ball. He can shoot but he's at under .320 from 3 and he clearly is not terribly confident in his jumper right now. He's at 43% overall, which is a perfect Triche number -- perfectly acceptable but hardly exceptional.

He's very solid defensively but he doesn't jump out at you the way Fab or rautins or MCW do (or did).

So while he's a really, really nice player and good piece of this puzzle. And while he's really unselfish and, I presume, a hard worker. And while he has stayed out of trouble and seems to be a model teammate. It can be frustrating to watch him play.

Is he a better player than a guy like Marius Janulis? Yes, but Janulis was easier to root for in some ways b/c you knew if he had to do anything other than hit an open jumper, you were in trouble.

So, after this long, rambling post, my basic point is that everyone should appreciate Triche as a key part of this program, but I don't think folks should be chastised for criticizing him. Particularly after a game in which, I think even BT would acknowledge, there were a lot of ugly moments.

I was just commenting on something I've observed when reading this board over the last 10 or 12 years. I may be way off base, but I'm certainly not saying our players are above criticism.

And I wasn't attempting to provide a comprehensive list, but rather a few examples. Scoop played the best and most consistent basketball of his career last season and was (and still is) being vilified by some people.

Some will never be satisfied with anything short of an undefeated season and complete domination from start to finish in every game. It reminds me of the trainer giving his jockey instructions before a race: "Go right to the lead and then improve your position."

 

[billsin01]

I was just commenting on something I've observed when reading this board over the last 10 or 12 years. I may be way off base, but I'm certainly not saying our players are above criticism.

And I wasn't attempting to provide a comprehensive list, but rather a few examples. Scoop played the best and most consistent basketball of his career last season and was (and still is) being vilified by some people.

Some will never be satisfied with anything short of an undefeated season and complete domination from start to finish in every game. It reminds me of the trainer giving his jockey instructions before a race: "Go right to the lead and then improve your position."

Yeah, I get that. I was mentioning scoop only b/c I feel like I've spent the past 24+ months defending him.

 

[SouthCampusHero]

It takes 6 wins in a row to win a national championship (Im not counting the new rounds). Can a senior guard play well from, say...the S16 through the NC game? When was the last time he put together 4 solid games against high level competition? If we have to rely on Dirty's jumper for even 4 games in a row, we are in big trouble. I think so people need to pump the brakes on the expectations of this team.

 

[rrlbees]

It takes 6 wins in a row to win a national championship (Im not counting the new rounds). Can a senior guard play well from, say...the S16 through the NC game? When was the last time he put together 4 solid games against high level competition? If we have to rely on Dirty's jumper for even 4 games in a row, we are in big trouble. I think so people need to pump the brakes on the expectations of this team.

he was our leading scorer vs ohio st and in the wisky game he also played well and came up huge at the end. we did not get knowcked out last year, nor any year, because of triche.

 

[OttoMets]

It's a board tradition to vilify very good four year players.

It's Triche's turn now. Last year it was Joseph. Once it was GMac. Next year it might be CJ.

Screw the program guys that are the foundation of SU's sustained excellence. Next year's model will certainly be better than this year's model, right?

It's funny that in response to Mike's less-than-stellar game, the logic is "It's not his fault we don't have anyone who can create - he's just trying to make things happen." For Scoop in 2011, the logic went more like "We don't have anyone who can create - Scoop sucks, he needs to stop trying to make things happen." Don't think he had too many six-turnover outings, nor did he get this close to four-per.

I think there's a bit of prejudice against four-year guys, or at least a positive bias in favor of players who are likely NBA guys, regardless of how they actually play.

I also maintain that Kris Joseph took a step backward in his senior year. Very good four-year guy and winningest Syracuse player ever, yes. Production dipped last season, though.

 

[OttoMets]

The fact that you win 25 games doesn't mean you can't point out the flaws that will keep them from winning 30+ -- even if it's just your humble opinion as a non 900-game-winning basketball coach. Some people seem to personally not like players, which is strange...

.

Both of those statements are exactly right. For the latter, I don't know why this is. Bugs me. People are nuts.

On the former, sorry to take this off topic and harp on something I've said elsewhere, but it is getting a little frustrating to see an artificial handicap present itself early in a promising season. Little things make the difference between 25+ and 30, between Sweet Sixteen and Final Four.

Three years in a row we get a McDonald's big. Fab's freshman year, he's allegedly too fat and inexperience to contribute. Rather than running him 30 minutes a night against cupcakes, he gets the 90-second hook, doesn't progress, and we waste a great season by Rick Jackson. Next season comes, Fab is raw but defensively dominant and improving his offense game to game. Do we play the strong, 6'8" shotblocker with a nice offensive touch alongside him or do we put him on the shelf and hope that the skilled but very undersized C.J. Fair can be a serviceble power forward in March? (Rhetorical.)

New season rolls around, we have a talented freshman center with a terrible hitch in his offensive game and the common freshman allergy to solid defense. Let him work it out with 30 minutes a game while leaning on the now-much-improved kid who spent his first season starting at power forward? No. Instead we'll move Rakeem to the five, where he has no professional future and despite his having demonstrated a.) great shotblocking ability from the forward spot, and b.) an ability to score facing the hoop, out beyond 15 feet. We have a capable backup center and this highly-touted freshman, but why not add another body at that position and rely on the two little guys to play the four this year.

Oy.

 

[billsin01]

Both of those statements are exactly right. For the latter, I don't know why this is. Bugs me. People are nuts.

On the former, sorry to take this off topic and harp on something I've said elsewhere, but it is getting a little frustrating to see an artificial handicap present itself early in a promising season. Little things make the difference between 25+ and 30, between Sweet Sixteen and Final Four.

Three years in a row we get a McDonald's big. Fab's freshman year, he's allegedly too fat and inexperience to contribute. Rather than running him 30 minutes a night against cupcakes, he gets the 90-second hook, doesn't progress, and we waste a great season by Rick Jackson. Next season comes, Fab is raw but defensively dominant and improving his offense game to game. Do we play the strong, 6'8" shotblocker with a nice offensive touch alongside him or do we put him on the shelf and hope that the skilled but very undersized C.J. Fair can be a serviceble power forward in March? (Rhetorical.)

New season rolls around, we have a talented freshman center with a terrible hitch in his offensive game and the common freshman allergy to solid defense. Let him work it out with 30 minutes a game while leaning on the now-much-improved kid who spent his first season starting at power forward? No. Instead we'll move Rakeem to the five, where he has no professional future and despite his having demonstrated a.) great shotblocking ability from the forward spot, and b.) an ability to score facing the hoop, out beyond 15 feet. We have a capable backup center and this highly-touted freshman, but why not add another body at that position and rely on the two little guys to play the four this year.

Oy.

Yeah, I don't really criticize JB for the most part because, well, he's won 900 games. I really don't mind that he's hands off to a large degree when it comes to babysitting the miscreants he brings to campus (i'm mostly kidding there).

But I think you could make an argument that he plays November in much the same way he plays March -- young guys get some run if they can prove themselves to some degree, but get a quick hook if they don't.

I will say that I can feel his pain when it comes to Xmas in the center and DC on the wing. If Christmas returns, my guess would be that we see a lot of this last year. This year, I just don't know that Christmas is capable enough on the offensive end and/or that Coleman will get to where he needs to be on the defensive end. You're right though, we probably won't find out.

I'd actually love to see a lineup with Christmas at the 5 and Keita at the 4 at times too. I think Baye's quick enough and hustles enough that he'd be a nightmare for opponents on the wing. I guess you have the same offensive issues with that lineup too.