Why in the world did we stick with Edwards??

[longislandcuse]

Need a big in.

marek and bourama gave us the L tonight. Learn from past games. Edwards was forced into a spot hes not ready for, we lost.

Ok, so if they foul out in the ACCT, we just concede an L?

 

[OrangeYaGladi]

Ok, so if they foul out in the ACCT, we just concede an L?

nope, we'll try Brendan Paul at center just for the sake of mixin' things up and tryin' something different

 

[JeremyCuse]

You act like we’re crazy for saying we should do something different than play a raw big who gave up a score every time he had to defend and can’t play offense.

Even if the other team scores at will, like they were... at least we have the advantage on offense.

We’re not Golden State but they played a death lineup of small ball and forced teams to match them. So Sims or Mack are guarding Hughes or Buddy.

If Braswell was available you could put him at the 4 and role with Guerrier at the 5. With Clemsons bigs trying to play hughes at the 4 and Buddy at the 3 wasnt going to work. Edward's is a project big who has zero business playing this year but our recruiting has put us in this situation. All that said if Edwards doesn't panic or Guerrier is looking for the ball on that pass SU wins. Brutal loss

 

[Trueblue25]

Ok, so if they foul out in the ACCT, we just concede an L?

Of course not but does any team lose their two leading rebounders and still expect to be in a position to win on the road?? We didnt purposefully mail this in.

 

[longislandcuse]

Of course not but does any team lose their two leading rebounders and still expect to be in a position to win on the road?? We didnt purposefully mail this in.

Of course we didn’t, but I don’t see how anyone (JB included) can just accept his play if we wind up in this situation again.

I’m throwing Goodine out there and moving Buddy down to the wing.

Try to get any stops we can and then spread the floor on offense and force one of their bigs to defend Buddy or Hughes.

 

[Dcuse]

It was Edwards who caused the turnover up one with less than a minute to play. I’m not saying he was good out there but nobody, including Sidibe, Marek or anybody else stopped what’s his name. It’s stupid to say it would have been better with Washington or whoever in there. Don’t be ridiculous.

 

[Brooky03]

nope, we'll try Brendan Paul at center just for the sake of mixin' things up and tryin' something different

you’re being obtuse

 

[STEVEHOLT]

I’ll go you two better ...

1. Argue all you want about him being in there under 5 .. but what was he doing on the court with two seconds left in the backcourt ? Is he going to take the inbounds and dunk it from
90 feet away ? What about the last play ? Is he even a better catch and shoot guy than the walk ons?

2. we had two TO left .. and the ball .. he catches it with just under 1 minute left and has a clueless look on face ... NOBODY can call TO ?

 

[JeremyCuse]

I’ll go you two better ...

1. Argue all you want about him being in there under 5 .. but what was he doing on the court with two seconds left in the backcourt ? Is he going to take the inbounds and dunk it from
90 feet away ? What about the last play ? Is he even a better catch and shoot guy than the walk ons?

2. we had two TO left .. and the ball .. he catches it with just under 1 minute left and has a clueless look on face ... NOBODY can call TO ?

Agreed about calling a timeout there, as soon as he hesitated JB should have called a TO.

 

[Brooky03]

It was Edwards who caused the turnover up one with less than a minute to play. I’m not saying he was good out there but nobody, including Sidibe, Marek or anybody else stopped what’s his name. It’s stupid to say it would have been better with Washington or whoever in there. Don’t be ridiculous.

Edwards cost us 6 points between offense and defense.

Andy Rautins played the 3 in the zone for a while back in the day. Nobody is going to convince me Andy was appreciably more athletic or knowledgeable in that spot than Buddy, to the point that it’s absurd to suggest Buddy could play the 3 in the zone for a few minutes.

And Guerrier could do more at the 5 than Edwards. He at least has muscle and athleticism.

 

[rrlbees]

I’ll go you two better ...

1. Argue all you want about him being in there under 5 .. but what was he doing on the court with two seconds left in the backcourt ? Is he going to take the inbounds and dunk it from
90 feet away ? What about the last play ? Is he even a better catch and shoot guy than the walk ons?

2. we had two TO left .. and the ball .. he catches it with just under 1 minute left and has a clueless look on face ... NOBODY can call TO ?

He wasn’t on the court for the last play. HoWash came in for him.

 

[samspann1]

I’ll go you two better ...

1. Argue all you want about him being in there under 5 .. but what was he doing on the court with two seconds left in the backcourt ? Is he going to take the inbounds and dunk it from
90 feet away ? What about the last play ? Is he even a better catch and shoot guy than the walk ons?

2. we had two TO left .. and the ball .. he catches it with just under 1 minute left and has a clueless look on face ... NOBODY can call TO ?

that's what I didn't get. Why not Goodine in that situation?

 

[samspann1]

He wasn’t on the court for the last play. HoWash came in for him.

He was in the game for the inbounds under our basket after Clemson made the GW FG

 

[longislandcuse]

Edwards cost us 6 points between offense and defense.

Andy Rautins played the 3 in the zone for a while back in the day. Nobody is going to convince me Andy was appreciably more athletic or knowledgeable in that spot than Buddy, to the point that it’s absurd to suggest Buddy could play the 3 in the zone for a few minutes.

And Guerrier could do more at the 5 than Edwards. Heat least has muscle and athleticism.

Even if we continue to give up bunnies with no resistance, at least we’re not playing 4 on 5 offense.

 

[rrlbees]

He was in the game for the inbounds under our basket after Clemson made the GW FG

I was addressing the comment about the last play.

 

[longislandcuse]

that's what I didn't get. Why not Goodine in that situation?

What happened to him today? He seems so much better than HoWash.

Especially bizarre in that quick catch/shoot end-game scenario where he at least has size to shoot over someone.

 

[samspann1]

I was addressing the comment about the last play.

Why was he in for the inbounds after the GW basket, though? He was in the backcourt...it was bizarre.

 

[longislandcuse]

Why was he in for the inbounds after the GW basket, though? He was in the backcourt...it was bizarre.

I actually didn’t hate that. He clearly wasn’t getting the ball, might as well drag his man out of the play. The defender stuck with him so he couldn’t get depth up the court and catch it/call a timeout.

Now why he was in the game there?... no idea.

 

[Newhouser]

It's insane that he is that bad. I mean this is D1 athletics but it's still basketball. Common sense on some of his miscues is all we needed. No scholly player should be that useless no matter what. Inexcusable.

 

[Cuse_NYC]

Ya, I mean sounds harsh, but it’s very true.

 

[br801]

Who plays the 4 if QG is at the 5?

The key here is have as many guys as possible playing out of their natural position at crunch time.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Of course we didn’t, but I don’t see how anyone (JB included) can just accept his play if we wind up in this situation again.

I’m throwing Goodine out there and moving Buddy down to the wing.

Try to get any stops we can and then spread the floor on offense and force one of their bigs to defend Buddy or Hughes.

I don’t see how it’s anything but this. We play 4-1 defense. There is no difference between 3 and 4. We get smoked on rebounds anyway, but it might be better if Q was in the middle because he’s our best rebounder and wouldn’t be stuck out at foul line extended because Buddy and Joe are too slow to cover traditional guard coverage areas.

 

[STEVEHOLT]

I’ll go you two better ...

1. Argue all you want about him being in there under 5 .. but what was he doing on the court with two seconds left in the backcourt ? Is he going to take the inbounds and dunk it from
90 feet away ? What about the last play ? Is he a better catch and shoot guy than the walk ons?

2. we had two TO left .. and the ball .. he catches it with just under 1 minute left and has a clueless look on face ... NOBODY can call TO

Edwards cost us 6 points between offense and defense.

Andy Rautins played the 3 in the zone for a while back in the day. Nobody is going to convince me Andy was appreciably more athletic or knowledgeable in that spot than Buddy, to the point that it’s absurd to suggest Buddy could play the 3 in the zone for a few minutes.

And Guerrier could do more at the 5 than Edwards. He at least has muscle and athleticism.

I’d bet gurrier at the 5 is actually our best player at the 5

 

[orangepassion]

This is one of those games where not giving a guy like Edwards more minutes earlier in the year costs us. It's hard to expect much from a guy to come in to that situation who hasn't played any meaningful minutes

 

[rrlbees]

What about the last play ? Is he a better catch and shoot guy than the walk ons?

He wasn’t in on that last play.