Big Ten Geeks - Rutgers Preview
- Thread starter MadRU
- Start date
It's a general report on the state of the team with no real insight. Let's look at a few stats and call it a day.
This guy, Josh has no clue about the current team at RU.
Some good points and some bad. Our shot selection was terrible but more three point was definitely not the answer last season, except for Issa maybe needing to be bolder. Pikiell has been pretty allergic to three pointers historically but he also had the best interior force in the AE for three seasons in Warney, and guys who could shoot the three had a green light (Carson Puriefoy shot 196 of them his senior season when he was shooting 40%).
I've said that if the offense doesn't look a lot different this year than the last two then there's a problem. So, we shall see.
I've said that if the offense doesn't look a lot different this year than the last two then there's a problem. So, we shall see.
The majority of that piece was just a hit job on Rutgers as a program. Uncalled for
Until Rutgers has a winning season fans should expect the media to make comments that fit the perception of a losing sports team.
Time to start making the preseason predictions predictors eat some crow
I didn’t want to click on it. But I eventually did. And while reading that piece of trash, I could swear that I felt some brain cells dying in my head with every stupid word.
I agree. Why the need to be so negative. Especially about a program that is doing good in the world.
So that 'preview' didn't preview anything about the team. It just talked about how awful we've been historically. Ok. He also said there are no Sanders level recruits when we have two 4 star freshman with Mathis actually being very similarly rated to Sanders coming out of high school.
He didn't even bother to research our team.
He didn't even bother to research our team.
I’ll never get back the time wasted reading that “preview” of RU basketball.
GO RU
GO RU
Thank you. Based on the comments above, I'll save some brain cells by not reading.
The only to stop trash like this from being written is to win games. That said, the things said about the bad shooting are true. You want to win games? Make some damn shots.
That's accurate based on rankings.
IIRC, Sanders was a consensus top-100 prospect. Rivals ranked him No. 75.
In the final Rivals150 for the 2018 class, neither Harper nor Mathis were ranked in the top-100.
Also, I think that 2015 class was a much deeper class than 2018.
I don't care what the ranking of the kids are when they come into the program. I'm more concern about their development. Sanders and Freeman were great, but the rest of the class never made it through. The 2018 class hasn't played a game, so it's not fair to compare the classes. For all we know the 2018 class could be better overall because the players develop and stick around. Let's wait for the narrative to be completed in a few years before we compare the two.
Depends which recruiting service you use. TOS has them pretty much ranked the same
Fair enough, but @sct1111 seems to care because he brought it up.
While I get where you're coming from but if you're going to do a preview and compare guys, their rankings when they come into the program is a fair way to do it.
I don't care about TOS rankings. But I totally understand fans using whichever site's rankings lists their favorite team's recruits the highest
Yeah, we all like to cherry pick. Rivals gave Harper a proper ranking and hes a 4*... other sites stuck with him being an unknown 2* and 247 composite reflects both.
We're fans, half of us take offense at the low rankings and embrace the favorable ones, the other half use them to perpetuate their weird negative cynicism about the program...
Either way, the guy had a point about Sanders v. Mathis/Harper in the rankings, but these kids get to be coached by Pikiell for 4 years.
None of this will matter next Friday
That was a tough read. As in, I kept reading hoping he would get to his point, then he kept veering off track and talking about everybody but RU or giving a history lesson about RU. That's not exactly Rutgers 2018-19 Preview material.(miss leading title) Finally he got to his main point, what a let down 14 paragraphs later. Shoot more threes. Simply because he was right once many years ago about Pat Knight at Lamar.
I get what you're saying. I use to cover football recruits for a different site. The reason I say wait is because most kids have to develop to see their real potential meet their ranking. I felt Sanders was gifted, but he never expanded his outside shot and at times still played defense like it was punishment. Therefore, I think he didn't completely fulfill his potential as a 4-star recruit. On the other hand, Eugene Omoruyi has clearly outplayed his ranking. Omoruyi is much better than he was when he first at Rutgers.
Another example would be Geo Baker. Baker doesn't have the same skills as Sanders, but his overall development and improving abilities may be a better fit for Rutgers. Therefore, his impact might be more significant than what Sanders' delivered during his time at Rutgers. That's the coach in me coming out. [laughing]
Last edited:
Did you read the article? It was nonsensical. It was trash.
And yes, we get it... it is important to shoot the basketball through the hoop. And if we make long shots, we get a bonus point. Got it.
The article wasn’t offensive to me as a Rutgers fan; it was offensive to me as a writer. Rule #1: have something relevant to say.
Last edited:
Why would someone link this crap on our board.. or any board?
It is positively juvenile.
I actually thought I'd like to see what people have commented about this "preview". I clicked the button to "load comments".. I found 4 comments.. in total covering over 2 years.. for the history of this vanity blog.. none of them about this article and all of them citing obvious errors.
It is positively juvenile.
I actually thought I'd like to see what people have commented about this "preview". I clicked the button to "load comments".. I found 4 comments.. in total covering over 2 years.. for the history of this vanity blog.. none of them about this article and all of them citing obvious errors.
75% was trash.
Trying to win in this game without utilizing the 3 point shot was a point that he made that was right on. He would have won points with me if he questioned or debated the fact that personnel led us to the lack of 3 makes (and attempts).
Yes the article was mostly trash, but a lot was factual. The part about the RU job being dead end is factual too. I know none of us want to hear it.
Trying to win in this game without utilizing the 3 point shot was a point that he made that was right on. He would have won points with me if he questioned or debated the fact that personnel led us to the lack of 3 makes (and attempts).
Yes the article was mostly trash, but a lot was factual. The part about the RU job being dead end is factual too. I know none of us want to hear it.
Yup, the institutional stuff is sadly accurate. Of course everyone here is optimistic for it changing as we move into the Big Ten with the new facility and all, but athletics aren't really a university priority, and basketball certainly isn't.
The way he presented the 3-point argument was ridiculous to me. Going forward, yes, we absolutely need to be shooting more of them. But looking back? He wanted the 20-percent brigade of Sanders, Freeman, and Williams taking MORE 3-pointers? That makes no sense at all.
To be fair, most of the article is about the futility of being a head coach at Rutgers. He’s not off until it can be shown otherwise. Maybe 2019-2020 will be the year that changes.
He should/could have made the case that the roster composition was flawed. Where his analysis fell real short was not questioning or outright saying that this year's team will be different.
I think talking about past RU coaches and lack of success after leaving Rutgers is totally irrelevant. This reporter seems to enjoy in basking in the negative. If he did his homework and analyze the current situation, he would report that a down program has hope in the future because it’s found the “right coach!!”The program is moving in the right direction so stop with the past negativity.
As you referenced 3 point shooting should be better simply because of addition by subtraction.
1. You are correct that previewing the '18-'19 season the lack of coaching success in the past means ZIP
2. Playing devil's advocate.....what is different this time vs. all the other coaches? Entering Year 3 we have always thought we had the "right guy"....any argument otherwise does not accurately paint the picture of the majority of fans.
As I'm finding in most things I read about basketball these days, the only bball talk in the article focused on Offense. It's like Defense doesnt even exist for these bloggers (many journalists as well). If you watch the RU team and follow stats, any laymen would know that this is where Pike has made his early mark on the team. RU is # 3 in Big10 in overall Defensive efficiency as well as other team stats.
In building a program, that's where it starts, effort and defense.
In building a program, that's where it starts, effort and defense.
From a Rutgers fan perspective, I think you're right. I think the difference though, is that the general CBB community seems to be uniformly high on Pike as well. With Hill, Rice and Jordan, I dont think that was the case... and I think even amongst fans even, we thought Hill could recruit but couldn't coach, people were still pissed about Waters... with Jordan, there were already whispers about work ethic and coaching focus year 3, and his tenure started with that degree BS. With Rice, I cant remember? Maybe nothing bad until the tapes, but certainly no one had such a uniformly positive impression of him and the staff, the way it is with Pike...
So usually there's already a thread with some negatives that eventually grows into the problem. With Pike, what would that be? He reached on JUCO PG during separate times, and his focus on D and rebounding has taken away from O? Not sure...
Even the coaching continuity on staff is crazy for the lack of turnover.
This does feel different somehow
