Here is the reality on "running an offense ".....
- By RU MAN
- Men's Basketball
- 85 Replies
Kapuna, I agree with everything you said except that our kids in a motion offense (which I want) would shoot better. Maybe, maybe not. They have proven too often that they cannot be relied on to knock down a three when it’s needed. That to me goes to recruiting. Pikiell has done a poor job at identifying “complete “ players on both sides of the ball. It’s okay to bring in a few defensive first players and have them grow in Pike’s system, but he must identify and recruit offensive minded players that can develop on the defensive side.An offensive system is meant to give a schematic advantage over your competition. Look at the data you provided. The leaders of those stats all have easily identifiable offensive systems and schemes. Most of them have one thing in common. An offense built around motion offensive screening principles. You put our roster in any of those systems and I’m sure the data would improve for our players. ISO/horns/4 flat stationary set especially this year the way the roster is constructed was probably the least efficient set.
Would you say Iowa Wisconsin Purdue has an athletic advantage over the rest of the B1G? But they are always near the top of the standings because they run a defined system and recruit to their needs and expectations.
Pike’s inability to bring in pure shooting guards like Spencer or a Gillespie on Maryland is Pike’s fault. Couple that with bad offensive sets like we’ve seen since he got here nine years ago, and you have questionable or poor outcomes.
So, yes we need to recruit complete guards who can knock down threes at or near 40% but even they won’t hit their shots all of the time if they’re stuck in this pathetic resemblance of an offense he runs.