Twilight Time

For your consideration, take two basketball teams. I submit:

Team A has a 22-10 record, with a Hall of Fame Coach with 700+ wins. The team went 8-8, finishing 6th place in 12 team conference.

Team B has a 22-10 record, with a Hall of Fame Coach with 700+ wins. The team went 10-6, finishing 5th place in a 16 team conference.

Team A went 4-6 in its last ten games, including a first round lost in its conference tournament to a 5-11 team. Team A is 9-9 since January 3rd.

Team B went 7-3 in its last ten games, including a first round win in its conference tournament against a 6-10 team. Team B is 12-6 since January 5th.

Team A beat Georgetown at home, and St. Johns on the road. They lost to Marquette at home. Of the team’s 10 losses, 3 were double digit, 6 were by 6 or more points. They lost three games by one basket.

Team B beat Georgetown at home, and split two games with St. Johns this year. They beat Marquette on the road. Of the team’s 10 losses, 1 was a by double digits, 3 were by 6 or more points. They lost three games by one basket.

Team A has a player who was suspended for game for unsportsmanlike conduct on the court (contributing to one loss).

Team B has a player who is playing on one healthy leg for the course of the season, and missed some games earlier as a result (contributing to a couple of losses).

Team A was selected by the NCAA Committee to be a #6 seed, putting them in as one of the top 24 teams in the country.

Team B was ignored by the NCAA Committee, meaning said committee thought they were not one of the top 45 (approximately) teams in the country.

Welcome to the Twilight Zone.

Fade to black.

Team A, is of course, the Duke Blue Devils. Team B is the Syracuse Orange.

NCAA Thoughts

I forced myself to wait three days before putting any comments on the failure of the NCAA Selection Committee to include Syracuse in the tournament this season. After those days of reflection, I’ve come to the conclusion that there’s nothing really new I can add that has not already been said by the media and by my fellow Syracuse bloggers.

Simply put, the Syracuse Orangemen should have been in the NCAA tournament. All of college basketball knows it, and the selection committee knows it. I think we had a situation were the selection committee wanted to prove it was smarter than everyone else, and so they went against conventional thinking in order to prove that point. The problem is that the committee isn’t smarter than everyone else; there’s a reason the consensus had Syracuse in, and now the committee has exposed themselves as fools.

I do have some comments about the NCAA Selection process, that this years’ committee did help to illuminate. Many of the following points I’ve mentioned in my blog previously, and for those of you who know me, some of these are positions I’ve had for years.

The Conference Season Should Matter: I’ve long maintained that if a team cannot finish .500 or better in their conference, they should not be allowed in the NCAA tournament, regardless of any other criteria. I don’t care if they were 7-9 in the Big East Conference, and if all sixteen teams in the Big East were better than the remaining 300 teams in college hoops. If you cannot beat half of your competitors in your own conference, you do not deserve to play for the national title. The only exception to this rule is the automatic selection for conference tournament champions.

Use Common Sense: Relating back to the conference seasons, the committee needs to pay attention to the obvious. Forget every other statistic out there and use some common sense. Syracuse finished fifth in the Big East this season, ahead of both Villanova and Marquette. Syracuse was 2-1 against these two teams. Yet you put in two teams that Syracuse had beaten head-to-head and finished ahead of? You know, if a selection looks strange, then it is strange. Don’t go looking for other statistics to justify it.

Mid Major Exclusion: I think the selection committee, heavily comprised of BCS schools, is moving along with the same agenda as the BCS in college football, and that is they want to exclude the mid majors and give more of the action to BCS conferences. They are slowly putting in tools and criteria that will eventually entice the BCS conference schools to only play other BCS conference schools. This will prevent the mid major schools from having an opportunity to prove themselves over the course of the season against quality opponents, and thus, make it easier to exclude mid majors in future selection processes because their ‘body of work’ will fail to meet the requirements of other schools.

How is the committee doing this? They are relying heavily on an RPI formula that penalizes teams for playing other teams with weak schedules. Read that again… its not that they are penalizing teams for playing weak schools; they are penalizing teams for playing other teams (weak or strong) that have weak schedules. The third component of the RPI formula is your opponents’ opponents record. So if you put a mid major on your schedule, you get saddled into your own RPI score, the combined efforts of all the schools in the mid major’s conference. So if you play Holy Cross, no matter if Holy Cross goes 28-0, you also get the net impact of the entire Patriot Conference on your RPI. That can be costly.

I’ve stated before, I think the mid majors deserve to be fairly represented in the NCAA tournament (and in the BCS in football), and it’s a travesty that anyone would try to exclude them or minimize their chances. But we all know money drives the show, and the BCS conferences want all of their schools to be included.

Balance the Selection Committee: If you’re going to have eight major conferences, and represent only six of them on the selection committee, you had better make sure that you have very clearly defined why you excluded schools from the non-represented conferences in favor of schools for those represented. It seems highly coincidental that the three most questionable teams in the tournament (Arkansas, Illinois, Stanford) were represented on the committee, and the five most controversial omissions (Syracuse, West Virginia, Kansas State, Drexel, and Air Force) were not. The selection may have been just, but is sure smells otherwise. And if you’re going to have a committee structured that way, you need to bend over backwards to make sure the end results look good.

Leave Tournament the Size It Is: I’m all for leaving the NCAA tournament at 64 teams (I’d remove the ‘play in’ game; that’s an insult and travesty to those two teams). You’re always going to have schools left out. No matter what number you choose, someone is left out. 64 works well, and it makes earning a bid to the tournament mean something. Otherwise, why not add two rounds to the tournament and go to 256 teams… then virtually everyone would be included. Though, I know this year’s committee would have found a way to exclude Syracuse (no, I’m not bitter).

Big East Is Bloated: I’ve been maintaining for several years now, ever sense the Big East originally expanded to 14 teams, and now 16, that it was too big, and it was going to hurt them long term. The larger a conference gets, the more it will have a representation of all the types of teams in college hoops… meaning very good teams, good teams, mediocre teams, and bad teams. If you have an 8 team conference, it’s quite possible you’ll have 7 or 8 great teams. With sixteen teams that’s not going to ever happen, and so there are going to be low end teams dragging down the conference RPI and SOS.

Plus, it leads to unbalanced scheduling, which is a joke itself. How can Syracuse and West Virginia be in the same basketball conference and never play each other once this season? And it absolutely hurt Syracuse that they had to play dogs UConn and St. Johns twice each, while only getting the opportunity to play Pitt, Notre Dame, Georgetown, Louisville, and Marquette once (in the regular season).

Schedule a Major School Outside the State of New York: This is a note specifically for Syracuse. They’ve become the poster child for a weak out of conference schedule, which is unjustified. Each year, you can easily show that their out of conference schedule is representative of most major college out of conference schedules. The difference is that Syracuse accomplishes a lot of that without ever leaving New York state. Now I’ve ranted and raved several times about the fact that games in Madison Square Garden being 4 ½ hours away from Syracuse, and that fact being ignored frequently by the media. I’ll give you a perspective from Pittsburgh, my current home. Columbus, Ohio is 3 hours from Pittsburgh. Does Ohio State have a huge advantage in Pittsburgh? Washington DC is 4 hours from Pittsburgh. Does Georgetown have a huge advantage in Pittsburgh? New York City is 5 ½ hours from Pittsburgh. Do the Panthers have a huge edge in Madison Square Garden? Of course not.

Does Syracuse have an advantage in Madison Square Garden? Sure… because there are a lot of Syracuse fans in New York City, and Syracuse basketball fans travel well. But you know what, Notre Dame has a very large and supportive alumni base, and they get a nice crowd everywhere they go. Duke has a large national following and they get strong support everywhere they go.

No, the issue really is that Madison Square Garden is in New York state, and it makes is so easy for the national media to constantly say ‘Syracuse doesn’t leave New York state’.

So, Syracuse should identify an area of the country they want to heavily recruit, say Maryland or Virginia, and schedule an annual road game against Maryland, Virginia, Duke, or North Carolina and play them every year. Don’t even make it a home-and-home… just make it their annual road game down south. This will forever remove the ‘Syracuse doesn’t leave New York state’ label and give Syracuse a power conference rival on their schedule. Plus it enhances the recruiting pipeline in that area.

And as we all know from NCAA selection criteria, it doesn’t matter if you beat the good teams on your schedule. You just need to have them on your schedule. If you do the math, you would see that Syracuse’s RPI would be better off if they traveled to Pauley Pavilion in Los Angeles and was crushed by UCLA by 30 points, than if they stayed home, and crushed Colgate by 30 points. And don't schedule the mid majors. The committee will only penalize you if you lose to them; there's no advantage to beating them. That's wrong... but that's the reality.

Anyhow, these are the thoughts of a embittered Syracuse fan. Go Orange.

As Freshman Rebounders Go

Anyone who has watched Syracuse freshman Paul Harris play this season quickly realized that he is a terrific rebounder. Despite starting only one game this year, he is second on the team in rebounds with 229, and had a masterful 15 in the loss to Notre Dame the other night. Harris came to Syracuse with extremely high fan expectations (far too high in my opinion at the time), and it is rumored he would have gone straight to the NBA if new rules had not prohibited it.

The new rule probably is fortunate for Harris. While he shows sparks of defensive brilliance, and outstanding rebounding, he has often seemed totally lost in the offensive scheme and has demonstrated little shooting ability 10 feet and out. He has shown he is an explosive scorer near the hoop, and there is a lot of promise in this young man, and it appears we are fortunate to have him gracing the Orange uniforms. A few years in college basketball should help him adjust and develop his offensive game.

How good has Harris’ freshman year been? He hasn’t been a starter, so his stats may look askew. He has only 7.2 rebounds per game. I say only, because that’s still an impressive number as a freshman. Only five Syracuse freshman have ever exceeded that mark and they were all starters:

Carmelo Anthony 10.0 rpg
Dale Shackleford 8.8 rpg
Derrick Coleman 8.8 rpg
Roosevelt Bouie 8.1 rpg
John Wallace 7.6 rpg

In terms of total rebounds, Harris is still fifth behind the following: Anthony 349, Coleman 333, Billy Owens 263, Shackleford 256 and Bouie 242.

Harris’ stats are deflated because he has not been a starter nor played starter minutes. I figured I would check all Syracuse freshman since 1982-83 (the first season I have minutes played information), and see which freshman had the best rebound per minute. I multiplied the number by 35, since a start player would play about that many minutes per game if given the opportunity, and that makes the numbers more intuitive I think (it doesn’t change the results). I also restricted the list to freshman who played at least 300 minutes. Harris has 229 rebounds in 693 minutes of playing time. That works out to 11.57 rebounds per 35 minutes played, which is by far the best number any Syracuse freshman has had (at least since 82-83, and freshman couldn’t play prior to 73-74 anyhow). The top seven Syracuse freshman rebounders per 35 minutes played is as follows:

Paul Harris 11.57 (229 total rebounds)
Derrick Coleman 10.02 (333)
Hakim Warrick 9.66 (168)
Wendell Alexis 9.61 (134)
Carmelo Anthony 9.60 (349)
Etan Thomas 9.01 (105)
John Wallace 8.96 (221)
Rony Seikaly 8.94 (198)

Coleman was always a terrific rebounder, and if you remember had 19 rebounds in the national championship game against Indiana. Alexis was somewhat of a surprise to me, though I do remember how often he and Rafael Addison used to come into games their freshman year and help out the Orangemen. Alexis sat behind Tony Bruin and Andy Rautins’ dad Leo, so it was tough getting his playing time. Carmelo didn’t have any upperclassmen in his way, so he got all the playing time he needed.

In fact, if you look at the top five Orangemen in terms of rebounds per 35 minutes played, regardless of class, Harris would be #4 on this list. Mr. Derrick Coleman, the NCAA’s all time leading rebounder, holds the top three positions with 12.04, 11.95, 11.86. Harris would be fourth with his 11.57, and then Rony Seikaly comes in fifth at 10.81, and Owens sixth at 10.69.

Of course, it is important to remember that when you extrapolate statistics, you are making assumptions that may not hold true. Averaging 21.7 minutes per game, Harris can expended a lot of energy in short bursts, and that could help to inflate his rebounds per minute. If he were to play 35 minutes per game, he could likely tire and be less effective per minute, though still getting more total rebounds.

Just to look into the ‘what if’ scenario a little further, I figured out what Harris’ scoring would be if he played 35 minutes a game (same caution holds as mentioned above). He would have 14.2 points per 35 minutes played, which would be good for 8th on the all time Syracuse freshman list. The top five freshman in scoring per 35 minutes played are:

Carmelo Anthony 21.4
Lawrence Moten 18.9
Sherman Douglas 16.6
Rafael Addison 16.0
Eric Devendorf 15.8

The surprise on that list was Douglas. For those of us old enough to remember the General, he came out of no where his sophomore season to lead the Orangemen to the national championship game. Yet, if we had looked at the numbers the year before, you could see was quite productive in his minutes played, limited because of the great Pearl Washington ahead of him.

I will be curious to see how Paul Harris develops and grows the next couple of years, especially with the graduation of Syracuse’s front line: Demetris Nichols, Darryl Watkins and Terrence Roberts. He’ll have ample opportunity to get his playing time next year and show what he can really do on a regular basis.

For now, we can just sit back and watch him provide his rebounding spark against the opposition in the upcoming NCAA tournament.

All Big East

The Big East just keeps getting worse and worse each year with the number of guys it puts on its first team. 11 players named to the first team. The Big East has always been bad on their math. Even in the early 80s they used to traditionally name six guys to the All Big East first team, usually with the distinction that Player of the Year was in addition to the five other guys. Then it grew to seven. Now eleven. It sure does take away from the honor doesn’t it?

Ten more guys made the Big East Second team. So, if you’re one of the top 21 players in the Big East, you’re on the first team or second team.

Thankfully the Big East has dropped having a Big East Third team. Guess they decided it might be a little too obvious is they started putting guys like Matt Gorman on an All Big East team.

They also put eleven guys on the all Rookie team. So I’m wondering what the qualification is to be on that squad? My guess is you were either a starter, or one of the top two reserves on your team. It seems to me they’ve honored every freshman they could have. I guess it’s a real slight if you are not on this team.

Congratulations to Demetris Nichols who made the first team. I’m pretty sure he would have made the first team even if it was five or six guys. If fact, there were five guys who were unanimous: Nichols, Herbert Hill, Roy Hibbert, Jeff Green, and Aaron Gray. Sounds like a great five… they should’ve stopped right there. I realize they wouldn’t be recognizing any guards, but the Big East has precedent for leaving a position off the first team. When Etan Thomas was a sophomore and junior, there were no centers on the Big East First Team; so he was voted the best center in the league, but did not make first team.

Nichols is the 15th different Orangeman to be named to the Big East First Team (overall they’ve had 25 recognitions).

Also congratulations to Eric Devendorf for getting honorable mention, and Paul Harris for making the All Rookie Team.

I also thought it was interesting that several players on the First Team are on their first All Big East selection. Demetris Nichols made his first selection, along with Russell Carter, Colin Falls, Herbert Hill, and Frank Young. That doesn’t happen too often. It also means it will be interesting who wins the Most Improved Player award… you have five guys who never were even honorable mention, and now are first team. That’s quite an improvement.

Regarding the new Syracuse Uniforms… they are hideous. Why couldn't Nike have picked Georgetown, UConn or Duke instead. Then I could mock them and tease their fans. Uggggh.

Nova Loss

I’m not sure if there is ever a good loss, but I was not disappointed in the loss the Orange had to Villanova. I thought the team showed it had grown over the course of the season, and showed some poise down the stretch. In the last few weeks, they seemed to finally have grasped the concept of working the ball inside out, looking for the open shooters and mixing that with strong moves to the hoop. They seemed to have improved their overall zone defense. Sooner or later it was inevitable that Andy Rautins would cool down, and it was good to see Eric Devendorf snap out of his shooting slump to carry the team.

Yesterday we saw one of the most impressive dunks I’ve seen in a while, when Paul Harris brought it home to end the first half. I’m not sure if a replay does it justice. And we almost saw one of the most miraculous come backs in basketball history. Syracuse was down by 6 points with five seconds to go, and no time outs… and they had a chance to win the game.

A few observations:

I’ve been saying for a while now that I think the Orange had to finish the regular season 6-0 to lock an NCAA berth. I think I still believe that; finishing 5-1 isn’t locking us into the tournament. I think 5-1 with the win over Georgetown is very helpful… but not a lock. Yes, we are 21-9, and 10-6 in the Big East. And if they did the selection right now, I’m fairly certain that we would be in. However, I believe a first round loss in the Big East Tournament would put us on the bubble.

It’s not that we need to add to our resume. It’s that a loss to St. John’s or UConn would damage that resume. Neither of those two teams are quality opponents, so a loss would be a bad loss. If I were on the committee, I’d want to know Syracuse is going to take care of business, and a loss there would not be an indicator to me. It would also leave the Orange at 6-4 over their last 10 games; that’s not bad, but it’s not a plus. The number of quality wins on the Syracuse resume is low: Marquette, Villanova and Georgetown. Especially when compared to the poor losses: Wichita State, Drexel, St. Johns, UConn.

We could still make the NCAA with a first round loss, but I think it would be from the bubble position. A first round win moves us to at least 22-10, with no worse than 7-3 in our last ten games, and a loss at that point would be to a quality team (in all likelihood). So, winning the first round should lock it in for us.

Demetris Nichols had a good chance at being the Big East Player of the Year, but I think he lost it with the end of the game yesterday. It’s a tight race this year, with none of the top five players really separating themselves from the pack. If Nichols had made both of the technical free throw shots, and then made the three point shot to win the game… that would have clinched the award for him. It would’ve been a great player pulling off the miracle ending to a big game. He’s made many big shots this year, but I think he needed that moment to do it. The fact he failed to deliver, as harsh as that may be, will likely be held against him, and I think that puts the ball back in the court of a front runner for Pitt or Georgetown.

Eric Devendorf looked great on the court yesterday, playing mostly in control. It was good to see him actually succeed when he put the team on his back; he’s tried that a few times this season but with little success. He still had his five turnovers, and he did miss ten shots, but it was a great effort for Devo. It was the first time since the 2003-04 season that two different Orangemen have scored 30+ points in a game in one season (Hakim Warrick and Gerry McNamara did it that season). It’s also the first time an Orangemen has scored 30+ points in a road game since Warrick did it against Nova in February 2005.

Terrence Roberts is playing extremely inspirational basketball. I’ve questioned his toughness before, but its amazing the toughness and grit he’s shown the past couple of games. Playing on one knee, and only 24 minutes of playing time he pulled down 8 rebounds (four offensive), and showed some solid defense. Now he did go 0-2 from the free throw line ( that’s 54-108 50% for this season, 167-347, 48.4% for his career ), and he took another three point shot and missed (Why does he even try? For his career he’s now 5-25, 20%). But Roberts is going out on a positive note… and that’s how a lot of people will remember him.

Andy Rautins finally had his hot streak snapped, and was 2-11 from three point range. However, for those who think he offers little else on the court, he still played tremendous zone defense, and had four assists with only one turnover.

Did I mention Paul Harris’ dunk? Wow. If anyone has been paying attention, Harris is only 10 rebounds off the team lead. Not too bad for a guy who hasn’t had nearly the minutes many thought he should.

Nova shot 29-32 from the free throw line. You’re not going to win too many games when the opponent shots that many free throws and makes 91% of them.

I’m trying to keep an open mind about Syracuse having new uniforms. I’m not optimistic on what I’ll think. And if any color but Orange is the dominant color, I’ll be extremely disappointed. I am getting tired about everything always being about money. I’d like to see a college actually do something for another reason. Perhaps, maybe for educational purposes, pride, history, tradition, etc. I can think of a lot of reasons… the monetary focus needs to be toned down several notches.

Don’t think it can be done? Hey, this blog is written for free, and I hope you find it has some quality to it. And there are several other blogs out there regarding Syracuse basketball, all of them with quality, and most of them done by fans who have a passion for the game and for the team. So money does not need to drive everything.

Go Orange!

RY

When You're Hot You're Hot

When you’re hot your hot. Over the last four games, Andy Rautins has been on fire from three point range. The lanky sophomore is 17 of 28 from three point range (60.7%). That’s an amazing four game clip. And he’s been consistent… it’s not like one or two big games in that four game stretch. Rautins has gone 4-5, 5-8, 3-6 and 5-9 from outside the arc in that stretch.

It does beg the question, though, what is going to happen to the Orange when Rautins has an average night? It’s unreasonable to expect him to continue at a 60% clip (though I’m sure his few remaining critics will bash him next time he goes 1-4). During this four game losing stretch the Orange would likely have lost to St. Johns and Providence if Rautins had made one less three in each game, and both the South Florida and UConn games were close until about 3 minutes to go. In both those cases, if Rautins hadn’t been hot, Syracuse could have been trailing with about 3 minutes to go, and that changes the entire complexion of the team.

Over the same four game period, Eric Devendorf has shot a horrendous 14 of 50 from the floor (28% !!). Demetris Nichols has made some big shots, but he’s mired in a 16 for 48 slump (33%). I guess hope is there is Rautins starts to shoot more human, that Devo and Nichols might both pick up their scoring.

Cuse Country points out that the current configuration of Devondorf, Rautins, Nichols, Harris and Watkins is likely the best Syracuse combination on the court. I agree with that, and I do think it has the best chemistry. Boeheim has struggled all year with how to get Harris on the court, and the key really is that the 6’3” Harris (there’s no way he’s his listed 6’5”) is a much better power forward than any other position, and the loss of Roberts is opening opportunities for Harris, in many ways.

First of all, Harris is only effective if he can drive to the hoop. With Harris, Roberts and Watkins all on the court at the same time, that’s three Syracuse players and three defenders all hovering around the hoop. Far too much congestion. So if you take Roberts off the court, there’s some space beneath the hoop for Harris.

Second, when you have three shooters on the court like Rautins, Devo, and Nichols, the defense has to spread to cover them. That opens up the interior even more for Harris to operate. It also allows players like Rautins to make a nice cut to the hoop through a clear lane (and he made a beautiful move today that Harris promptly rewarded him for). So Harris as a ‘point forward’ seems to work well.

Third, with three perimeter players already on the floor, you need to have some inside guys, which means Josh Wright is off the court, allowing Harris to play 'point forward' and handle the ball more, something he is comfortable with.

As Orange fans we’ll have to be very concerned about the six man rotation Syracuse currently has, especially since Harris and Rautins aren’t used to playing more than 25 minutes a game. But it is an exciting unit, and right now, I’d rather watch them lose with this unit, then win ugly games with the old configuration (well… maybe I won't go that far).

Single Season Leaps

Demetris Nichols is having a great season, and his scoring is up significantly from last season. He’s scored 511 points this year, as opposed to 466 points last season. If the Orangemen play about 8 more games, he’ll get to 662 points, which would be a 196 point increase from last season. It begged the question to me, what is the record at Syracuse for the biggest point increase from one season to another?

There have been fifteen players in Syracuse history to have increased their scoring by 300 or more points from one season to another. Five of those were guys in their senior seasons:

Ernie Austin 348 point increase (445 senior year, 97 points junior year)
Greg Monroe 344 (490, 146)
John Wallace 341 (845, 504)
Danny Schayes 318 (496, 178)
Bob Kouwe 302 (349, 47)

Of that fivesome, John Wallace stands out as very impressive. Think about it: he scored 16.8 ppg as a junior, was a possible first round NBA draft choice, and came back to school and increased his scoring by 341 points (not to mention taking the team to the brink of a national championship). His increased scoring (5.4 ppg) and 8 additional games (that’s what you get for making a deep tournament run) accounted for the difference. Austin and Kouwe both had injuries their junior year, and Monroe and Schayes were on the bench behind seniors.

Four guys made huge scoring transitions from their sophomore year to their junior year:

Greg Kohls 536 point increase (574 points junior year, 38 points sophomore year)
Dave Johnson 418 (621, 203)
Demetris Nichols 360 (466, 106)
Preston Shumpert 333 (662, 329)
Otis Hill (482, 195)

Kohls has the record for the biggest single season increase; 536 points would be a great season by itself, and he increased his scoring by that amount.

Six guys made the big jump their freshman to sophomore seasons:

Sherman Douglas 513 point increase (659 points sophomore year, 146 points freshman year)
Marty Byrnes 359 (377, 18)
Todd Burgan 350 (459, 109)
Rafael Addison 304 (565, 261)
Hakim Warrick 304 (518, 214)
Stephen Thompson 300 (492, 192)

As much as all these Orangemen made huge strides, no player in Syracuse history made as big a leap as Nick Paul. Paul increased his scoring by 209 points from his junior season to his senior season. That doesn’t seem so amazing does it?

Consider that Nick Paul played from 1918-1920. The typical scoring leader averaged 150 points in a season in about 15 games or so. Paul scored 216 points his senior season (1919-20) to lead the team in scoring; he had scored only 7 points his junior season. He had scored only 1 point his sophomore season. Paul scored 216 points his senior season, after scoring a total of 8 points in his college career up to that point. And while I haven’t been able to confirm it yet, I believe 216 points was a Syracuse single season scoring mark at that point in time. That is an amazing transformation.

That would be about as remarkable as Matt Gorman suddenly scoring 28 points a game his senior season.