Coaches ‘not shocked’ Rutgers is struggling: ‘They’re not hard to guard,’ unnamed sources say
Anonymous coaches discuss Rutgers basketball's poor start, Dylan Harper and Ace Bailey's play and more.
A dose of reality?
- Thread starter zappaa
- Start date
48% of Bailey's shots are long 2's. That is INSANE. Why does a lottery pick have to settle for those shots? Why do we allow that?
At this point, he probably has more long 2 attempts than the entire Alabama team.
Other coaches have to be laughing at what they are witnessing.
At this point, he probably has more long 2 attempts than the entire Alabama team.
Other coaches have to be laughing at what they are witnessing.
Bulletin board...
"But Bailey is inconsistent. He’s an unwilling passer and a disinterested defender and his shot selection is so bad that if he isn’t making ridiculous shots, they are in trouble."
“Those two are incredibly talented young men with very bright futures in the NBA, but they don’t try hard defensively,” a high-major assistant who faced Rutgers this season told CBS Sports. “In college, any time any team is built around two freshmen and those freshmen don’t necessarily have the maturity or intangibles of what goes into winning yet, it’s going to impact your team. That’s not saying they’re bad young men, they just don’t have what it takes to win yet.”
Ooofff..
"But Bailey is inconsistent. He’s an unwilling passer and a disinterested defender and his shot selection is so bad that if he isn’t making ridiculous shots, they are in trouble."
“Those two are incredibly talented young men with very bright futures in the NBA, but they don’t try hard defensively,” a high-major assistant who faced Rutgers this season told CBS Sports. “In college, any time any team is built around two freshmen and those freshmen don’t necessarily have the maturity or intangibles of what goes into winning yet, it’s going to impact your team. That’s not saying they’re bad young men, they just don’t have what it takes to win yet.”
Ooofff..
“I’m not sure how much fun guys are having on the team,” the coach told CBS. “It’s hard to win when guys aren’t having fun. This can’t be easy for Pikiell.”
This i agree with
This i agree with
While the offense doesn't look aamzing, the problem is defense and rebounding
Grant over Martini helps with both
Grant over Martini helps with both
“They don’t have enough shooting around those guys. And the guys that can shoot are bad defenders. The guys that do defend can’t shoot.”
- ahhh, this guy doesn’t know what he’s talking about 🙄😂
- ahhh, this guy doesn’t know what he’s talking about 🙄😂
"It's not a surprise," the high-major assistant said. "I'm not shocked by them not being great — at all. … You don't have to guard everyone else. From a technical preparation standpoint, you don't have to overly defend everyone else. The game plan is: How do you stop those two guys?
But they're not hard to guard. They don't run around. It's not like four or five people touch the ball and feel involved. If you want to be a good offensive team you have to weaponize the guys around them."
Presuming Harper and Bailey wind up being drafted as currently projected, if Rutgers fails to make March Madness it will be the first team ever to do so with two top-five NBA Draft picks in the same season. They'd also be the first school in the modern era to sign two top-five high school prospects and fail to qualify for the Big Dance.
Typically, if you've got super-high-end NBA talent at more than one position, you're qualifying for the Big Dance — with plenty of room to spare. That's not the case in Piscataway. Rutgers is as compelling as it is oftentimes underwhelming.
Pikes exit interview !
But they're not hard to guard. They don't run around. It's not like four or five people touch the ball and feel involved. If you want to be a good offensive team you have to weaponize the guys around them."
Presuming Harper and Bailey wind up being drafted as currently projected, if Rutgers fails to make March Madness it will be the first team ever to do so with two top-five NBA Draft picks in the same season. They'd also be the first school in the modern era to sign two top-five high school prospects and fail to qualify for the Big Dance.
Typically, if you've got super-high-end NBA talent at more than one position, you're qualifying for the Big Dance — with plenty of room to spare. That's not the case in Piscataway. Rutgers is as compelling as it is oftentimes underwhelming.
Pikes exit interview !
Unless his overall game improves dramatically Ace Bailey is not going to be a top 5 pick.
See this mock draft, as of games in the last week: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/60...draft-cooper-flagg-dylan-harper-johni-broome/
The writer states plainly he does not love Bailey's game, but try as he (the writer) might he cannot find a way to bump Bailey out of the top 4 in the draft.
What do you think of opposing coaches assessments, and how much is attributable to coaching or culture
same...
last game when Harper and Bailey both were out there was a stretch where we looked like the RU teams we've grown accustomed to. flying around on defense and getting to loose balls and just playing crazy hard. breath of fresh air for me. the problem was we couldn't do a lick offensively lol...
the answer to fixing what is wrong is probably having both of them focus way more effort on defense and then involving others more on offense. it's true that the rest of our guys (other than Acuff who showed he can and Derkack who can at least get to the foul line regularly with his takes) can't get there own shot in a iso ball offense. but they can get theirs if they are setup by more willing passers like Dylan was vs. Columbia.
the million dollar question is will they ever commit to doing it...probably not but one can hope...
Nobody says anything about this for Bailey cause he makes some but Derek Simpson took the same amount of inefficient shots and we chastised him for it.
Simpson was a much better defender too...
Makes you wonder if Bailey signed here to put on highlights without having to play for a "team" for a year thinking it would improve his draft stock showing his ISO ball highlights
In either case if the team does not go 11-5 over the back half of the season we will be checking off a lot of FIRSTS we don't want to be a part of
While the article simply echoes every other thread on this message board thus far, it certainly is nice to read the validation in "black and white" print from actual Division One coaches.
Article does shed some light on the issues.
Again - the talent around these two, unfortunately has not shown to be big ten starter type talent
The effort is questioned.
Lot of blame to go around. Having Cliff on this team definitely would’ve helped some (not a game changer) but absolutely better than the tradeoffs we got in the portal
Again - the talent around these two, unfortunately has not shown to be big ten starter type talent
The effort is questioned.
Lot of blame to go around. Having Cliff on this team definitely would’ve helped some (not a game changer) but absolutely better than the tradeoffs we got in the portal
100% accurate assessment of this team.Coaches ‘not shocked’ Rutgers is struggling: ‘They’re not hard to guard,’ unnamed sources say
Anonymous coaches discuss Rutgers basketball's poor start, Dylan Harper and Ace Bailey's play and more.www.nj.com
There’s been this idea out there that Ace and Dylan have been completely sensational and it’s everything else on Rutgers is holding the team back, and there’s some truth to that.
However, i do appreciate Norlander putting the perspective out there that Ace has been straight up bad. 100 ORtg is not good at all, he’s not currently effective at any of the guard skills that ostensibly make his game special and he’s a negative defender
However, i do appreciate Norlander putting the perspective out there that Ace has been straight up bad. 100 ORtg is not good at all, he’s not currently effective at any of the guard skills that ostensibly make his game special and he’s a negative defender
I firmly believe had we held onto Cliff and the roster been exactly the same otherwise that we would have AT LEAST 3 more wins on the schedule right now.
Largely irrelevant because it seems like we never had a chance but given the shortcomings at the center position it is the most obvious regret
Cliff might make this a tournament team over night, his rim protection skillset is so tremendous and it’s such a glaring weakness right now
At this moment he is reminding me ALOT of Isaiah Collier and Derrick Lively from the standpoint of HS ranking... shaky college success (in Lively's case no college success) and draft stock falling as a result.
Both players did little to nothing to justify their rankings from a production standpoint and the comparisons to Collier may be more accurate as Collier produced from a PPG standpoint but was on a terrible team
Cliff would certainly help, but he alone wouldn't be the cure to all our woes. His minutes with Alabama are down this season, along with his scoring, rebounds and blocks per game. Not to mention, he is surrounded by a better cast with Alabama yielding more good looks.
I agree that Bailey has been more bad than good (relatively). Amazing scoring talent, but there is much more to the game than that. However, he's like 11 years old so I'm sure he will grow and develop.
This is a bit of a misguided take... hes averaging 7.5, 6.1 and 1.1 at Alabama over 18 MPG... take it to the 30mpg he would be playing with us and hes pretty much efficiency wise maintaining the 13-11-2 line we came to expect from him the last two years
Citing he is not "helping" the #5 team in the country and that his impact would not be more pronounced on the #XYZ team in the country that he would make us is apples and oranges
I've paid a lot of attention to the types of team Matt Nordlander cited in his CBS Sports article about the possibility of Rutgers becoming the first team with two lottery picks to whiff on the NCAA Tournament. He mentioned how it rarely works out well when teams that don't traditionally attract blue-chippers suddenly get one or two. This idea first occurred to me back when Seton Hall struggled mightily in 2000-01 with the No. 1 class in the country joined a team coming off a Sweet Sixteen appearance (and only missed the Elite Eight by two or three points). That team had a lottery pick (Eddie Griffin) and another first-rounder in Samuel Dalembert, and yet lost in the first round of the NIT to another disappointing team, Alabama with Gerald Wallace.
The reasons that team failed were not the same thing as the issues your team is having now. In fact, they started fast before the old guard began having issues with the freshmen and factions developed and the chemistry was poisoned. Tommy Amaker was at a loss over how to handle it and I'll always wonder how it would've played out had he not bolted to Michigan.
I can see some slight similarities, though, when I look closely enough. Obviously, Steve Pikiell (who, to me, is an excellent coach) builds his program on tenacious defense and has gotten more than the expected mileage out of under-recruited and sometimes less-talented kids because he knows how to wring value out of them. From the very start (and without knowing too, too much about Harper's and Bailey's games other than that they were extremely highly rated), I wondered if they would be willing to play the kind of defense that is the Pikiell brand. To me, if you don't, the thing starts to fall apart. I also figured that part of the appeal of Rutgers to these guys was going to be their extremely high usage rates. It's hard to imagine this wasn't always part of the (promised or implied) deal to them. They are clearly both in college to showcase their talents. And I think that can be fine, expecially on a team without any real established scorers, but that still has to occur within the context of a fluid offense (and I know some feel that such a thing is not a Pikiell calling card, but I'm not sure I agree).
But the iso ball I see every time I watch these guys on offense (which is only about half of the actual opportunties, to be fair) diminishes th entiure team concept and, I think, can cause fratures on a team. All of your other portal additions came there knowing they would be the supporting cast, but that doesn't necessarily mean they thought they'd just be spectators. And I think they can reconcile their very limited role on offense if they thought the entire starting five would be giving their all on the other side of the court, but that hasn't been the case. I don't know if Harpr and Bailey (especially the latter) aren't instinctive or skilled defensive players or if they just don't care. But either way, it's a major problem. On its face, it harms the team on both ends of the court, but the locker-room implications (and I haven't heard this to be the case, to be sure) are the kind of thing that could blunt any chance of improvement.
From where I sit, this team has more than enough talent to have a winning Big Ten record and would be dangerous in a conference tournament setting. And given that your two featured guys are both freshman, it would be reasonable to expect improvement over this winter. But if this the way the die is cast, it does appear pointed toward a flop. I remember holding out hope in 2001 for that team to turn the corner, but it never happened. And it was nver going to. They made a run to the Big East semis, but ran out of gas in the second half and that was that.
The reasons that team failed were not the same thing as the issues your team is having now. In fact, they started fast before the old guard began having issues with the freshmen and factions developed and the chemistry was poisoned. Tommy Amaker was at a loss over how to handle it and I'll always wonder how it would've played out had he not bolted to Michigan.
I can see some slight similarities, though, when I look closely enough. Obviously, Steve Pikiell (who, to me, is an excellent coach) builds his program on tenacious defense and has gotten more than the expected mileage out of under-recruited and sometimes less-talented kids because he knows how to wring value out of them. From the very start (and without knowing too, too much about Harper's and Bailey's games other than that they were extremely highly rated), I wondered if they would be willing to play the kind of defense that is the Pikiell brand. To me, if you don't, the thing starts to fall apart. I also figured that part of the appeal of Rutgers to these guys was going to be their extremely high usage rates. It's hard to imagine this wasn't always part of the (promised or implied) deal to them. They are clearly both in college to showcase their talents. And I think that can be fine, expecially on a team without any real established scorers, but that still has to occur within the context of a fluid offense (and I know some feel that such a thing is not a Pikiell calling card, but I'm not sure I agree).
But the iso ball I see every time I watch these guys on offense (which is only about half of the actual opportunties, to be fair) diminishes th entiure team concept and, I think, can cause fratures on a team. All of your other portal additions came there knowing they would be the supporting cast, but that doesn't necessarily mean they thought they'd just be spectators. And I think they can reconcile their very limited role on offense if they thought the entire starting five would be giving their all on the other side of the court, but that hasn't been the case. I don't know if Harpr and Bailey (especially the latter) aren't instinctive or skilled defensive players or if they just don't care. But either way, it's a major problem. On its face, it harms the team on both ends of the court, but the locker-room implications (and I haven't heard this to be the case, to be sure) are the kind of thing that could blunt any chance of improvement.
From where I sit, this team has more than enough talent to have a winning Big Ten record and would be dangerous in a conference tournament setting. And given that your two featured guys are both freshman, it would be reasonable to expect improvement over this winter. But if this the way the die is cast, it does appear pointed toward a flop. I remember holding out hope in 2001 for that team to turn the corner, but it never happened. And it was nver going to. They made a run to the Big East semis, but ran out of gas in the second half and that was that.
Cliff comes with his own issues but he would have solved the biggest problem in the paint with defense and rebounding. RU wins vs Princeton and Kennesaw....that would put them at 10-5 and at least in the game with a clean resume with 16 games to go. There would be hope
My point is Cliff isn't the only missing piece of the puzzle. Maybe he's worth three wins as you say, but Alabama doesn't rely as much on him (though admittedly their bench runs much deeper), and as we saw last season (with Cliff) there are more issues that need to be resolved here.
this is what I have been saying since day 1...the team but most importantly Ace/Dylan were not going to be committed to playing defense here because that isnt their bag. Once that was clear, the dye was cast. Pikes bread and butter falls apart and you got the mess you saw against St Johns which was red flags all over the place. If they were coming back next year yeah then you can hold them accountable and make them play defense, but they came here because there was an oppportunity to showcase their offensive skills together and at RU as opposed to Kansas or Indiana, they would be able to do it because the program was pretty barren coming back.
Bailey makes a solid number of these difficult shots.
Simpson was a TERRIBLE shooter. He finished at 30% last year. I think some said the worst in P5? He is shooting just 37% in the A10. He is 4th on his team in shot attempts and points so he isn't the focal point.
I will say that I thought Simpson did a good job in getting shoots in similar spots. Ace takes his shots all over the court. Id love to see a shot chart for him. I honestly don't know how he shoots at such a high percentage given he often doesn't take the same shot more than once in a game.
It's not crazy to think that Bailey saw our offensive scheme as something that would benefit him.
Honestly, I thought the same thing regarding the St. Johns game. They collapsed at the end of the game and seemed uncapable of playing basic defense. I hoped it was just because it was a scrimmage, but that didn't turn out to be the case.
Lively was playing hurt for most of his year in college, was only healthy the last couple of games.
I'm not just using hyperbole when I say this, but some of our defensive breakdowns and failed switch offs make it almost look like the team hasn't ever played with each other before. ☹️
The amount of wide open dunks and layups other teams get is alarming… on the regular. The contested 3s I can live with. Defensive breakdowns screams that some of them just don’t get it rotationally
This feels like a team that was allowed to act and do whatever they want because of potential elite talent and experience. It seemed like we wanted experienced transfers to bring along our elite freshmen and they would set the world on fire.
This team should have been held to the highest standards the minute they were on campus, and it feels like they were not.
This team should have been held to the highest standards the minute they were on campus, and it feels like they were not.
The old saying Gef, gifted and talented players are easy to coach but crave and need struture and direction.
Especially during the adjustment, step up in competition phases of their careers
Last edited:
and I gave this team more than enough chances to show that they could play defense...the Monmouth game was disturbing and then the Ohio State/Princeton games confirmed it was not going to change
ironically without Harper in the lineup RU played its best defense of the season in the 2nd half vs Wisconsin albeit the offense was downright dreadful. Put Harper back in the lineup and you will not see that defense and it becomes his team and the whole purpose of the team changes
