Commits for 2015
- Thread starter Hope4RU
- Start date
4 players - 2 posts (officially both C/F), 1 guard, 1 forward. Jeune is the pick of the litter. The team also will have Jeune's sister Ashli, who redshirted this season, available.
Here they are
Here they are
Great! Now all we need is a pronunciation guide for a few of the names.
These sound like RU players. Looking forward to making their acquaintance, and to seeing Ashli in action as well.
These sound like RU players. Looking forward to making their acquaintance, and to seeing Ashli in action as well.
Definitely looks like a great class that adds in two areas that we desperately need help at:
1.) An outside shot
2.) A more consistent inside presence.
I'm excited to see what these ladies bring to the table!
1.) An outside shot
2.) A more consistent inside presence.
I'm excited to see what these ladies bring to the table!
I'm also looking forward to seeing our new players next year, along with our returning players, but it will take me a long time to adjust to life without Betnijah Laney. She gave it her all every day, every game, getting pounded and going back for more. I hope we see her likes again, but I'm not so sure. I'm not talking skills, I'm talking HEART.
According to Coach Newton, the commits are:
1. A very good point guard who reminds her of Coach Pointer --- except she can shoot.
2. A post player who is a banger --- my take is someone like Ariel
3. A post player who can do everything
4. Jeune, who she believes is extremely underrated and who can shoot
1. A very good point guard who reminds her of Coach Pointer --- except she can shoot.
2. A post player who is a banger --- my take is someone like Ariel
3. A post player who can do everything
4. Jeune, who she believes is extremely underrated and who can shoot
After seeing four UCONN women knock down threes consistently, Stringer needs to finally understand that being ranked something like 332 out of 343 schools in 3's compared to a team like UCONN, which is ranked in the top 20 of making 3's isn't go to cut it, if she wants to get that elusive championship.
I was glad to see C. Vivian loosen the reins a bit this season and go for more offense. I realize the defense was hurt by injuries throughout the year so we didn't employ the '55' as much as we normally would. But Stringer needs to take the good of what her offense did this season and elevate it even higher, if she wants Rutgers to get back to elite status. We need shooters who can consistently hit the three. Not one specialist like C. Hernandez, but two or three women who can knock it down. That will open up the paint and Rutgers will up their average at least ten points per game, which against the good schools is the difference between winning and losing.
I was glad to see C. Vivian loosen the reins a bit this season and go for more offense. I realize the defense was hurt by injuries throughout the year so we didn't employ the '55' as much as we normally would. But Stringer needs to take the good of what her offense did this season and elevate it even higher, if she wants Rutgers to get back to elite status. We need shooters who can consistently hit the three. Not one specialist like C. Hernandez, but two or three women who can knock it down. That will open up the paint and Rutgers will up their average at least ten points per game, which against the good schools is the difference between winning and losing.
I agree that the team ought to shoot more 3s (and I think CVS feels the same way, FWIW), but it's interesting how little correlation there is between shooting a lot of 3s and being successful.
UConn is 10th in 3-pointers made per game, but here are some of the other teams in the top 20: 1. Sacramento State, 6. Villanova, 8. San Jose State, 11. Boston College, 14. IPFW, 15. Lipscomb, 16. UC Davis, 19. Drake, 19. Iona. Meanwhile, while Rutgers is close to the bottom at 2.3 3-pointers made per game, LSU and Baylor also are near the bottom.
(Sacramento State, by the way, made a frightening 12.4 3-pointers a game, but finished the regular season 16-15 in the Big Sky.)
On another statistical bugaboo, I notice that RU's 15.4 turnovers a game ranks 129th, or just outside the top 1/3. Getting down to 14.4 would have put the team in a big tie for 70th, roughly in the top 20%, getting down to 13.9 would have put the team in 43rd and getting down to 13.4 would have put the team in the top 10%.
UConn is 10th in 3-pointers made per game, but here are some of the other teams in the top 20: 1. Sacramento State, 6. Villanova, 8. San Jose State, 11. Boston College, 14. IPFW, 15. Lipscomb, 16. UC Davis, 19. Drake, 19. Iona. Meanwhile, while Rutgers is close to the bottom at 2.3 3-pointers made per game, LSU and Baylor also are near the bottom.
(Sacramento State, by the way, made a frightening 12.4 3-pointers a game, but finished the regular season 16-15 in the Big Sky.)
On another statistical bugaboo, I notice that RU's 15.4 turnovers a game ranks 129th, or just outside the top 1/3. Getting down to 14.4 would have put the team in a big tie for 70th, roughly in the top 20%, getting down to 13.9 would have put the team in 43rd and getting down to 13.4 would have put the team in the top 10%.
Good observations, but you're leaving out why some of these teams weren't successful. They were not as talented as a whole as Rutgers with better athletes. Their defensive prowess often times is sub par. They might not have the height underneath to balance those 3's with points in the paint and those that can actually score. And those are just a few variables as to why those teams you mentioned are not successful. We know that to be successful, Rutgers has to become more balanced like the elite teams. Right now we're not.
Rutgers needs to become more balanced inside and outside the paint. We're not. We settle for too many one and done jump shots. Teams zone us to death and clog up the middle. We need to free up the middle in order to be successful against the elite teams. By being able to hit more 3's that will loosen up the middle. Also, bigs like Hollivay and Butts need to be tougher down in the paint. I've noticed too many times during the season where they were soft and had a lot of potential rebounds easily stolen away from them.
Scaife should continue working on her 3-pt shot during the off-season, because she has the ability to drain them from deep. Parker's percentage this year was pretty bad, but I get the sense that when she feels more comfortable in the offense and gets more game time, she'll sink more of them from downtown. If Cynthia works on her defense and quickness this offseason, combined with her improved knowledge of the system, I can see her getting significantly more minutes next year. And we'll see what the freshmen bring.
And BeKnighted--while Tasha could certainly score, I don't think anyone would have ever accused her of being a threat from long-range. Excited about that description though. While RU has certainly had a number of players who could score and pass (Cappie, Matee, Prince), I'd say our last pure PG was Rushdan--and she was a beast all over the court.
And BeKnighted--while Tasha could certainly score, I don't think anyone would have ever accused her of being a threat from long-range. Excited about that description though. While RU has certainly had a number of players who could score and pass (Cappie, Matee, Prince), I'd say our last pure PG was Rushdan--and she was a beast all over the court.
I feel like I have this argument again and again, and I guess I'm right about that.
My real point is that there is no one formula for success. Baylor makes very few threes (on a per-possession basis, probably about the same as or fewer than Rutgers) and is very successful - the Lady Bears rank 8th in scoring this year. Boston College makes a lot of 3s and is not particularly successful in scoring - the Eagles were 150th. (RU is 87th, which is better than most years, since scoring rank is affected by pace of game.)
Again, this is not to say that I don't think the team should shoot more 3s. I agree that it should, and that the talent to do so is there. (I do disagree with the people who think CVS doesn't want the team to shoot 3s; history shows otherwise.) Diversifying the offense almost always is good, and 3s are part of that. Honestly, though, I think a more serious and persistent problem is the inability of the guards to get the ball to players in the paint in a way that allows the posts to score - there are too many bad passes to open post players and low-percentage passes to post players who are not that open.
In addition to the new talent issue and team 3 point shooting, better coaching is required in passing/dribbling to reduce the number of turnovers ,improving the offensive moves of the centers and stop committing so many stupid fouls away from the basket.These are problem areas that have been ongoing for years and are difference makers in close games.It gets back to execution of basic fundamentals.The elite teams are well oiled machines and everybody else has flaws that are not corrected.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
New NCAA compensation model may cost power conference schools $300mill each- Latest: NewJerseyHawk
-
-
