On too... Syracuse at GT, Saturday

[Jacketman1]

@CuseJacket What can you tell me about Caleb Joseph? I know he was very highly touted out of high school, but I haven't seen him play much this year. Do Cuse fans consider him a bust, or a project that may pan out in 1 or 2 years?

 

[CuseJacket]

@CuseJacket What can you tell me about Caleb Joseph? I know he was very highly touted out of high school, but I haven't seen him play much this year. Do Cuse fans consider him a bust, or a project that may pan out in 1 or 2 years?

Bust. Project at best. He was not supposed to play last year but was forced into action due to Tyler Ennis' departure (which was a good decision from a striking while the iron is hot perspective, though I don't think he was NBA ready).

Joseph has already been passed by true frosh Franklin Howard. Next year 5* Tyus Battle joins the fold and has been told he'll also handle the rock. At this point Joseph may turn into Josh Heath, which for the Orange means he won't see the floor. A good chance he'll transfer.

 

[CuseJacket]

Or maybe we had no idea how to attack the zone when the lob wasn't there. Nah, that couldn't have been. It's not like we had numerous possessions of just lazily tossing the ball around the perimeter before settling for a low percentage shot. Our post players shot just 43.75% so it's not like the "better passing lanes" to our bigs inside were resulting in a ton of high percentage shots.

Also, you think it's only in hindsight that I think Hunt getting only 5 shots all 3s is a bad offensive strategy? Really? Come on. How could anyone have been watching that game and not been wondering where Hunt was? What should we have done? How about have Hunt work the high post and attack from there? Or have him drive off the dribble splitting the guards? Especially off quick ball reversal.

2 of his FTAs came off an intended foul with 10 seconds left in the game when cuse was up 3. It wasn't a result of him getting a two point shot and getting fouled from it. So I missed one whole shot attempt where he got fouled. How does that change the point?



How could anyone be disappointed? There was no reason to expect anything different than we've seen before. The football team followed up an Orange bowl season with a 3-9 season. This team is coming off a year where we went 3-15 in conference. The two aren't in the same realm of disappointing. The only thing that was disappointing about this season was that gregory was still here for it.

Kind of agree with Peacone. It sounds like this was another game where you watched a portion of it. It's never going to be perfect nor am I professing that we were.

I posted pregame what I thought we should do. I suggested flashing MGH to the high post... the issue is who do you put around the perimeter? Putting Heath and/or Tadric meant the Orange could sag in the zone and say "shoot it". That prevents pretty much any post/elbow entry. I thought before, during, and after the game that the best line-up was MGH, Smith, Q, and two bigs.

For what it's worth GT did better than UNC attacking the zone schematically, imo. Difference was athletes. Marcus Paige shot 1-8 against the Orange.

 

[awbuzz]

From AJC - link -

One of the killer moments in the last 90 seconds
"On the first turnover, Adam Smith gave forward Nick Jacobs the ball up near the elbow, apparently in position to create a shot for himself or possibly to pass out of the high post. Jacobs said he dribbled the ball off his foot.
'It bounced just right off my foot,” he said. “There’s nothing I can do about that.' "

Yes there is something that can be done about that!

 

[awbuzz]

Too bad none of those 4 are anywhere near our best player who was regulated to 5 shots all from behind the arc. But sure. We attacked the zone fine and we're wondering why we ended up with 57 points.

"The Tech game plan was to find gaps in the interior of Syracuse’s 2-3 zone, which was successful to the extent that 32 of the Jackets’ 56 field-goal attempts were taken by their frontcourt players."

... the facts don't show that the "bigs" didn't get their opportunities.

 

[lv20gt]

Kind of agree with Peacone. It sounds like this was another game where you watched a portion of it. It's never going to be perfect nor am I professing that we were.

I watched it from about the 14 minute mark in the first half till the end of the game.

I posted pregame what I thought we should do. I suggested flashing MGH to the high post... the issue is who do you put around the perimeter? Putting Heath and/or Tadric meant the Orange could sag in the zone and say "shoot it". That prevents pretty much any post/elbow entry. I thought before, during, and after the game that the best line-up was MGH, Smith, Q, and two bigs.

And you also suggested we attack the high post with Mitchell and Jacobs. Neither of them are anywhere near good enough passers or ball handlers/shooters to make that strategy work. So I guess it is little wonder you thought we attacked it well and are surprised when the guys Mitchell and Jacobs combined for 8/21 shooting with 0 assists. You shouldn't have been, and it isn't a good job attacking the zone to get the ball into the highpost if the person who has the ball doesn't have the skills needed to make that effective.

 

[Peacone36]

Did he suggest Mitchell to the high post? I almost think he suggested the exact opposite citing Chuck poor decision making.

At this point one has to wonder if you are just trolling

 

[CuseJacket]

I watched it from about the 14 minute mark in the first half till the end of the game.



And you also suggested we attack the high post with Mitchell and Jacobs. Neither of them are anywhere near good enough passers or ball handlers/shooters to make that strategy work. So I guess it is little wonder you thought we attacked it well and are surprised when the guys Mitchell and Jacobs combined for 8/21 shooting with 0 assists. You shouldn't have been, and it isn't a good job attacking the zone to get the ball into the highpost if the person who has the ball doesn't have the skills needed to make that effective.

Did he suggest Mitchell to the high post? I almost think he suggested the exact opposite citing Chuck poor decision making.

At this point one has to wonder if you are just trolling

Iv20... First, I suggested Mitchell at the high post to turn and attack. Clearly, if we're looking for a facilitator, that's not the right option. I answered someone's concern re: this pregame. I thought we needed to use 2 bigs throughout the game to attack the rim and gut the Orange front court. We got close to accomplishing the latter with Coleman fouling out, albeit a little too late, and then BG overthought it and went small to match up against 'Cuse for about 2 minutes. That's another story.

Second, just because shots don't fall doesn't make a strategy wrong. With that logic letting MGH and Smith take 19 shots was a bad strategy. They only made 6.

You still haven't answered my question to you about what we do with the other 4 guys with MGH at the high post. Did you see Syracuse sagging off Heath and Tadric to close the high post entry lanes? I agree MGH would be better than Mitchell at the high post if all other things were equal, but they wouldn't have been. The tradeoffs weren't worth it, both in how I thought about it before and after the game as well as how I saw it go down. I feel like by now I understand the adjustments 'Cuse makes based on opposing personnel, having seen the nuances at least a few times before.

And if it makes any difference, Mitchell is 4th on my list of bigs vs. Syracuse and every other game. I hate repeating this because it's a dead horse from me but I'm not sure you read all of my posts so perhaps it serves a purpose here. I don't think he should get significant minutes, but now we're down the path of discussing rotations which I think nearly everyone has a problem with. How White ended this specific game having played 10 minutes, only 3 fouls, is something that would be worth discussing if it even surprised anyone here anymore.