As promised, here’s what Matt Glaude had to say in response to some questions. I’ll link when he posts my responses in an update.
UPDATE: My responses to Matt’s questions are here.
1. I’ll start with a question that has an extended preamble.
Going into the season, I saw Pitt and Syracuse as 2 similar squads: ” A point guard who has had a fantastic career, now the veteran leader expected to carry a large load with a squad around him that has questions and inexperienced, young talent. ” I gave the edge in preseason to Syracuse because of the coaching reputation. How did you see the teams going into the BE and how has it changed for you (if at all)?
Going into this season, I wasn’t sure what to expect from either Pittsburgh or Syracuse. I knew the Orange were going to have to develop some frontcourt presence to survive in conference, but I still anticipated around a 19 win campaign and a tournament birth. I’ve seen Boeheim take teams with less talent and still accomplish a great deal, and with McNamara and Devendorf potentially pacing the team, expectations were still fairly high.
As for Pittsburgh, I thought the jury was really out on them. I’ve never been a big Krauser fan, just because I think his bulldog mentality tends to limit his potential at times. With Taft and Troutman gone, I really thought the Panthers would struggle inside and as a consequence would suffer in the consistency department. This, of course, would end up being the worst assumption I’ve made since predicting a 6-6 Orange football campaign.
As it stands currently, I think Syracuse and Pittsburgh are teams that have started in different fashions but seem to be situated in a common predicament. Both appear to be struggling with finding a consistent modus operandi and have, at times, failed to find a true identity. Winning tends to mask some of these faults, but when things turn for the worse, they become a little more apparent.
Looking to the future, I see both Pittsburgh and Syracuse fulfilling preseason expectations of making the NCAA tournament. I’m not sure I expect either club to do much damage (which is about what I had anticipated preseason), but of course, things are bound to change, especially if someone gets hot in the Big East Tournament.
2. Right now Pitt looks to be the slightly better team by virtue of winning their tough non-cons and not playing Bucknell this year (taking the hit last year). At roughly 30% through the BE where do you see Syracuse and Pitt in the BE at this point and projecting to the end of the season?
At this juncture, I see Pitt and ‘Cuse sitting in that malaise somewhere behind Connecticut, Villanova, and West Virginia. Now, that’s nothing to scoff at. Those three aforementioned teams are potential Final Four selections depending on how their bracket is structured. However, with Pittsburgh and Syracuse stuck in that uneviable 4/5 spot with sleeping giant Louisville, that makes for a difficult run through the Big East Tournament in order to garner a reasonable NCAA seed.
I don’t really anticipate Syracuse or Pittsburgh really changing their position much to the end of the season. Neither squad has a particular fun road to close out the regular season and each team is fighting off some January/February demons right now. But still, being in the top five of this conference should be good enough to impress the selection committee come Selection Sunday, making for an interesting March.
3. Assuming Pitt keys in and try to stop McNamara first, what players need to have big games? What players coming off the bench need to contribute more?
If Pittsburgh were to stop McNamara (which is a distinct possibility given Gerry schizophrenic nature), Terrence Roberts and Demetris Nichols are both on the hook for carrying Boeheim’s Bunch. Nichols is probably the team’s most consistent outside threat, and if he can get hot, then Gerry can focus on distributing the leather instead of looking for his shot and taking the team out of its offense. Similarly, when McNamara is denied his shot, opportunities exist for Roberts to open up inside and carry some of the scoring load. He was able to do this in the second half against Villanova on Saturday. Of course, in the first half, he might as well have ridden the pine, because his play was borderline pointless.
Off the bench, it’s all about Arinze Onuaku. Onuaku has become the rebounding presence that this team has sorely needed this season. But, in classic Boeheim fashion, Onuaku has seen only sparse playing time because he’s a freshman. Should Roberts or Watkins fail to get the job done tonight, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Onuaku in the game to give the team a spark.
4. Syracuse doesn’t seem to be going deep on its bench this year. The 5 starters taking up an average of 76% of the total minutes, and 3 players averaging more than 32 minutes. How do you feel that will play out over the rest of the season, and can the players handle the load? Does the team have much of a choice?
Boeheim has always working with a rotation of about 7 guys, so seeing McNamara, Roberts and Nichols chew up minutes isn’t too surprising. What I do worry about is seeing fatigue out of Roberts and McNamara down the stretch. Both spent the summer hooping for the red, white, and blue, and given the fact that the bench behind them is young, thin, and inconsistent, there is a strong possibility that they could run out of gas.
But who knows. I expected Gerry to fall apart last season after getting that groin injury and he still managed to put together 40 minutes a night.
5. Are you hoping that Andy Rautins and Levon Kendall aren’t on the court at the same time too often so as not to hear too much from the play-by-play folks about how they were on the Canadian U-21 squad together and coached by Rautins’ father? Or is that just me?
“I’m from Canadah. They think I’m slow, eh?”
I love the Simpsons. Just an interesting note on Andy Rautins: he was recruited by two schools – St. Bonaventure and Syracuse. And Syracuse came into the picture real late. Now, apparently, he’s the best shooter on the team. Just goes to show that recruiting is an inexact science.
