Don't look RU fans ...The "RU doesn’t run offense claim is DEBUNKED .....

[RUJMM78]

Pikiell's teams over the last 5 years have never averaged 70pts a game.
Uconn has never averaged under 70 pts a game during that period and has averaged over 75 twice and over 80 once.
How do you argue with those facts?
That included a roster in 19-20 that had Yaboah, Young, Harper and Baker ( not to mention Peter Kiss)
BTW , in 75-76 Rutgers averaged 93pts a game

Players like Baker,Young and Harper could create and make shots off the dribble but the team still had long scoring droughts.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Is there a metric to determine quality of looks?

I watch these games in March and generally speaking the team getting the best looks is the one that advances.

Obviously there are going to be outliers like Oakland where you have one guy just go bananas, but that’s not a reliable effort for me.

It’s the same thing that happens here, we look like crap, then have one random night where a player pops off, and everyone says “see, we just need to shoot better.”

No. We don’t need to shoot better. We need to put these players in a position to succeed. You need to get them clean looks at the hoop at a high rate to increase your percentages.

It doesn’t even need to be a large bump. If getting consistent good looks increase our team percentage by 5%, that makes a HUGE difference.

QD was our best offensive player in my lifetime. The dude ran around off ball screens and got looks all day. If the defender stuck with him, they would just do a ball reversal and attack the weak side.

I know college bball is all ball screens now, but why can’t we run action like that a few times a game?

He played 7 games against mid-majors. Went 6 for 28 from 3 in these games. 5 of those 6 shots came against BU and St Peters.

So in summary - in 5 other games where the metric you reference, shouldn’t be a factor because shame on him if he can’t get open against mid-majors, he went 1-16. The point is - he has plenty of chances. Just didn’t execute. That doesn’t mean he won’t turn it around next season.

 

[RU84]

All we can do is compare the metrics. Princeton has a much more efficient offense with presumably much less talented players. Why would that be?

With average players maybe the offense would be ranked 100 this year, instead of 300. That still isn’t very good. Pikes offense topped out in the 70s. So the solution is to either recruit all NBA players like Kentucky, or run better schemes like Princeton, Purdue, etc.

First off Princeton does have talent, especially relative to the rest of the Ivy league. Where would you rank RU's talent relative to the rest of the Big this year? I would say near the bottom. Aside from maybe JWill, Xavian Lee was better than any of our guards. Also, players like Martini and possibly Allocco are being suggested as possible starters here next year.

Basketball games are determined 80% by talent and 20% by X's and O's and intangibles.

 

[The RUT]

He played 7 games against mid-majors. Went 6 for 28 from 3 in these games. 5 of those 6 shots came against BU and St Peters.

So in summary - in 5 other games where the metric you reference, shouldn’t be a factor because shame on him if he can’t get open against mid-majors, he went 1-16. The point is - he has plenty of chances. Just didn’t execute. That doesn’t mean he won’t turn it around next season.

So these mid major kids are good enough for us to be excited about in the portal but not good enough to have quality looks matter when playing them?

It’s not even about 3’s. We do NOTHING on the offensive end to get a players confidence going.

I’m not trying to compare anyone on our team to Caitlyn Clark, but even watching someone as talented as her play the other day. She goes clank clank clank, and then hits one and it’s game on.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

So these mid major kids are good enough for us to be excited about in the portal but not good enough to have quality looks matter when playing them?

It’s not even about 3’s. We do NOTHING on the offensive end to get a players confidence going.

I’m not trying to compare anyone on our team to Caitlyn Clark, but even watching someone as talented as her play the other day. She goes clank clank clank, and then hits one and it’s game on.

Huh? Just because there are a handful of good players on each team, 5 guys plays at a time. I guarantee you there are not 5 major conference level defenders on the floor at a time ever in those games. There is no way Gavin simply wasn’t open and if so, shame on him. Pike shouldn’t need to scheme to get him open in those games. You guys are making it like teams would’ve planned for him like he’s Luca Garza or something. Come on. He was simply a frosh who didn’t perform up to expectations in his debut year. Stop making it so much more than it was.

 

[seansherm]

Is there a metric to determine quality of looks?

I watch these games in March and generally speaking the team getting the best looks is the one that advances.

Obviously there are going to be outliers like Oakland where you have one guy just go bananas, but that’s not a reliable effort for me.

It’s the same thing that happens here, we look like crap, then have one random night where a player pops off, and everyone says “see, we just need to shoot better.”

No. We don’t need to shoot better. We need to put these players in a position to succeed. You need to get them clean looks at the hoop at a high rate to increase your percentages.

It doesn’t even need to be a large bump. If getting consistent good looks increase our team percentage by 5%, that makes a HUGE difference.

QD was our best offensive player in my lifetime. The dude ran around off ball screens and got looks all day. If the defender stuck with him, they would just do a ball reversal and attack the weak side.

I know college bball is all ball screens now, but why can’t we run action like that a few times a game?

This team was something like top 80% of college basketball in % of shots taken in the paint. Normally good shots if you are taking a 2. We were bottom 5% in shooting percentage in the paint.

 

[Eagleton96]

First off Princeton does have talent, especially relative to the rest of the Ivy league. Where would you rank RU's talent relative to the rest of the Big this year? I would say near the bottom. Aside from maybe JWill, Xavian Lee was better than any of our guards. Also, players like Martini and possibly Allocco are being suggested as possible starters here next year.

Basketball games are determined 80% by talent and 20% by X's and O's and intangibles.

Just a little additions/clarification...Given that these are all million dollar professional coaches, I'd say that college basketball games are determined 85% by talent and the remaining 15% by differences in the coaching and scheme among teams.

 

[The RUT]

This team was something like top 80% of college basketball in % of shots taken in the paint. Normally good shots if you are taking a 2. We were bottom 5% in shooting percentage in the paint.

An open look from 3 > contested shot in the paint.

That’s not to say we didn’t miss gimmies, but I would not define these as quality looks.

 

[The RUT]

Huh? Just because there are a handful of good players on each team, 5 guys plays at a time. I guarantee you there are not 5 major conference level defenders on the floor at a time ever in those games. There is no way Gavin simply wasn’t open and if so, shame on him. Pike shouldn’t need to scheme to get him open in those games. You guys are making it like teams would’ve planned for him like he’s Luca Garza or something. Come on. He was simply a frosh who didn’t perform up to expectations in his debut year. Stop making it so much more than it was.

To be clear, I never once referenced Gavin in my post. I’m talking about the team as a whole in regard to the offense.

Our offense has struggled for years, and it’s always been because of a lack of quality looks and off ball movement.

If you want to talk offensive struggles specific to individual players, it’s funny how EVERYONE sucked. No one played well offensively this year. Not a single player.

So miss me on the “Cliff has no O” or “Gavin was just a frosh.”

It is a consistent issue, and it’s the responsibility of the coaching staff to fix this.

Here’s how this all plays out though. Ace and Dylan show up and the offense improves. People say “see we just need talent.” Ace and Dylan leave for NBA, and the following year we struggle offensively again. Back to square one.

It is a glaring issue. Fix it. That’s your job.

 

[Eagleton96]

To be clear, I never once referenced Gavin in my post. I’m talking about the team as a whole in regard to the offense.

Our offense has struggled for years, and it’s always been because of a lack of quality looks and off ball movement.

If you want to talk offensive struggles specific to individual players, it’s funny how EVERYONE sucked. No one played well offensively this year. Not a single player.

So miss me on the “Cliff has no O” or “Gavin was just a frosh.”

It is a consistent issue, and it’s the responsibility of the coaching staff to fix this.

Here’s how this all plays out though. Ace and Dylan show up and the offense improves. People say “see we just need talent.” Ace and Dylan leave for NBA, and the following year we struggle offensively again. Back to square one.

It is a glaring issue. Fix it. That’s your job.

How do you square this with other analysis we've seen on this board that showed our talent level based on recruiting rankings was always near the bottom of the league? And, then the common sense logic that Pike mostly recruited raw athletes that didn't have innate scoring and shooting talent, because he had no choice? Wouldn't that also explain the bad O?

As Brian Fonseca said: it's the players. If you want better play, you need better players.

 

[seansherm]

An open look from 3 > contested shot in the paint.

That’s not to say we didn’t miss gimmies, but I would not define these as quality looks.

Yes, but we didn't have guys willing to shoot from 3, as our three guys with the ball in their hands were awful at it. Then Hyatt, Gavin, and Noah, who were willing to shoot it weren't very good at it either. These three guys took more three's per 40 this year than any three combined guys (that played, doesn't count Chol putting up 31 per forty minutes or whatever he did) from last years team. We also took more three pointers this year a game. We got them, we didn't make them.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

To be clear, I never once referenced Gavin in my post. I’m talking about the team as a whole in regard to the offense.

Our offense has struggled for years, and it’s always been because of a lack of quality looks and off ball movement.

If you want to talk offensive struggles specific to individual players, it’s funny how EVERYONE sucked. No one played well offensively this year. Not a single player.

So miss me on the “Cliff has no O” or “Gavin was just a frosh.”

It is a consistent issue, and it’s the responsibility of the coaching staff to fix this.

Here’s how this all plays out though. Ace and Dylan show up and the offense improves. People say “see we just need talent.” Ace and Dylan leave for NBA, and the following year we struggle offensively again. Back to square one.

It is a glaring issue. Fix it. That’s your job.

Ok - but Hawk’s main point still stands. Others before Gavin have succeeded as offensive players while a part of our system. So even if the offensive system needs to be upgraded, that doesn’t explain the poor play of any one individual. Plenty of players have had individual success on offense at Rutgers.

 

[AdventureHasAName]

For years, we "ran an offense" in the way that the Harlem Globetrotters run an offense ... three man weave at the top of the key until there was no time on the clock, then a contested three-pointer (in Harlem's defense, their offense ends with a dunk on a short white guy). The last two years, we actually had players moving around the court in the half court offense, but there seems to be no rhyme or reason to it. When was the last time you saw a backdoor pass on the baseline? Or a pick and roll where the pick man rolled to the basket and got a dunk? Or a play off an inbound pass that resulted in an immediate uncontested jumpshot from the wing?

Standing around for 20 seconds then firing up a three pointer that has a 22% chance of going in is not "running an offense."

 

[Eagleton96]

When was the last time you saw a backdoor pass on the baseline? Or a pick and roll where the pick man rolled to the basket and got a dunk? Or a play off an inbound pass that resulted in an immediate uncontested jumpshot from the wing?

Saw that plenty until this year. In fact Pike is known for his inbounds plays. And Paul, Ron, Geo, Calb, Cliff were excellent at the pick and roll and pick/dunk backdoor. Excellent.

 

[Westcoast]

If you can't debate the facts (because I actually post the information supporting it) that's your only response?? Mic drop...

My 2nd DEBUNKING is the following.

All 5 of the departing starters at RU were all underclassmen or less experienced in their careers at RU......SO....that means the player production with experience in the equation should have improved their productivity, because they had considerable playing time.

It is rare to see someone with more experience, go down in productivity as they advance in their careers.

The coaching of offense is a TALENT, skill and inability to make incomplete players into all B1G caliber offensive players. This notion that Pike can take Jalen Miller, Derek Simpson and JMike Davis (last 3 PGs or CGs) and turn them into 12 to 14PPG players, is the issue.

I get your points. But it's not "proof". It's just your theory for which you provide facts that you believe support your argument.

 

[Westcoast]

When was the last time you saw a backdoor pass on the baseline? Or a pick and roll where the pick man rolled to the basket and got a dunk? Or a play off an inbound pass that resulted in an immediate uncontested jumpshot from the wing?

I actually saw all these things in the first half of the road game at Minnesota. The second half was a different story.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

I get your points. But it's not "proof". It's just your theory for which you provide facts that you believe support your argument.

Let me reframe this for you. It’s not proof that Rutgers runs an effective offense (or any cohesive offense for that matter).

It does: however, sufficiently debunk the blanket (generalist) statement that all Rutgers players would do better offensively if they went somewhere else and played in a different system. There’s clear “proof” as Jacob Young had indisputably his best offensive year at Rutgers.

 

[fluoxetine]

Is there a metric to determine quality of looks?

I watch these games in March and generally speaking the team getting the best looks is the one that advances.

Obviously there are going to be outliers like Oakland where you have one guy just go bananas, but that’s not a reliable effort for me.

It’s the same thing that happens here, we look like crap, then have one random night where a player pops off, and everyone says “see, we just need to shoot better.”

No. We don’t need to shoot better. We need to put these players in a position to succeed. You need to get them clean looks at the hoop at a high rate to increase your percentages.

It doesn’t even need to be a large bump. If getting consistent good looks increase our team percentage by 5%, that makes a HUGE difference.

QD was our best offensive player in my lifetime. The dude ran around off ball screens and got looks all day. If the defender stuck with him, they would just do a ball reversal and attack the weak side.

I know college bball is all ball screens now, but why can’t we run action like that a few times a game?

Shotquality.com

We were #157 in this on offense, I.e. right about average

 

[Eagleton96]

Shotquality.com

We were #157 in this on offense, I.e. right about average

Good stuff. Also, having good shooters increases shot quality as the D extends and moves to cover shooters. Conversely, not having any major threats means that the D stays in it's comfort zone and can even attack.

 

[The RUT]

Shotquality.com

We were #157 in this on offense, I.e. right about average

This is what I was looking for, thank you.

In order of defensive shot quality adjusted, we're #19, here are the teams ahead of us with the offensive shot quality:

Spoiler: Defensive SQ Ranks with Offense

1. Iowa State - #28 O
2. Arizona - #11 O
3. Wisconsin - #33 O
4. Houston - #7 O
5. Creighton - #10 O
6. Virginia - #133 O
7. UNC - #8 O
8. UTjr - #9 O
9. Duke - #15 O
10. Baylor - #16 O
11. Mich State - #42 O
12. Wake - #70 O
13. BYU - #12 O
14. St Marys - #29 O
15. Colorado State - #49 O
16. Oregon - #59 O
17. Utah - #61 O
18. Cincy - #84 O
19. Rutgers - #157 O
20. Purdue - #3 O

I would argue there's nothing average about 157 either, that's actually horrible if you look at the teams around us.

Ahead of us - Illinois St, Marshall, LB State, Chattanooga, UT Arlington, UNC-G, Winthrop, Eastern Washington.
Below us - Austin Peay, GW, Pepperdine, Denver, Loyola Marymount, Eastern Kentucky, La Sale, Georgia St, Lousiville

Improve the offensive shot quality and the team will have more success.

Adjusted shot quality difference (adjOFF SQ minus adjDEF SQ) - 9 of the top 10 are in the Sweet 16 this year. Only team who's not in it is #10 Texas A&M who lost to #2 Houston in OT.

Purdue, Houston, Creighton, Arizona, UNC, Iowa State, Alabama, Tennessee, UConn, Texas A&M.

Put up quality looks and don't give up quality looks. Simple concept.

 

[seansherm]

This is what I was looking for, thank you.

In order of defensive shot quality adjusted, we're #19, here are the teams ahead of us with the offensive shot quality:

Spoiler: Defensive SQ Ranks with Offense

1. Iowa State - #28 O
2. Arizona - #11 O
3. Wisconsin - #33 O
4. Houston - #7 O
5. Creighton - #10 O
6. Virginia - #133 O
7. UNC - #8 O
8. UTjr - #9 O
9. Duke - #15 O
10. Baylor - #16 O
11. Mich State - #42 O
12. Wake - #70 O
13. BYU - #12 O
14. St Marys - #29 O
15. Colorado State - #49 O
16. Oregon - #59 O
17. Utah - #61 O
18. Cincy - #84 O
19. Rutgers - #157 O
20. Purdue - #3 O

I would argue there's nothing average about 157 either, that's actually horrible if you look at the teams around us.

Ahead of us - Illinois St, Marshall, LB State, Chattanooga, UT Arlington, UNC-G, Winthrop, Eastern Washington.
Below us - Austin Peay, GW, Pepperdine, Denver, Loyola Marymount, Eastern Kentucky, La Sale, Georgia St, Lousiville

Improve the offensive shot quality and the team will have more success.

Adjusted shot quality difference (adjOFF SQ minus adjDEF SQ) - 9 of the top 10 are in the Sweet 16 this year. Only team who's not in it is #10 Texas A&M who lost to #2 Houston in OT.

Purdue, Houston, Creighton, Arizona, UNC, Iowa State, Alabama, Tennessee, UConn, Texas A&M.

Put up quality looks and don't give up quality looks. Simple concept.

Put up quality looks and don't give up quality looks while having high end talent. Simple concept.


Fixed it for you

 

[The RUT]

Put up quality looks and don't give up quality looks while having high end talent. Simple concept.


Fixed it for you

Chicken or the egg.

I'm not going to sit here and say talent doesn't matter, but there's no reason for us to be surrounded by teams like Illinois State, Marshall, LB State, Pepperdine, Austin Peay. It's pathetic.

 

[seansherm]

Chicken or the egg.

I'm not going to sit here and say talent doesn't matter, but there's no reason for us to be surrounded by teams like Illinois State, Marshall, LB State, Pepperdine, Austin Peay. It's pathetic.

You probably aren't wrong, but the schools you listed at the top are basketball blue bloods and the schools you mention around us very possibly have been better at basketball the last 30 years. It takes more than four years of decent basketball to rise to the top.

 

[The RUT]

You probably aren't wrong, but the schools you listed at the top are basketball blue bloods and the schools you mention around us very possibly have been better at basketball the last 30 years. It takes more than four years of decent basketball to rise to the top.

You’d be surprised, most of those teams are in the 30-50 range on average with their recruiting classes.

Bama, UNC, UT, UConn are the ones up top.

 

[fluoxetine]

Chicken or the egg.

I'm not going to sit here and say talent doesn't matter, but there's no reason for us to be surrounded by teams like Illinois State, Marshall, LB State, Pepperdine, Austin Peay. It's pathetic.

You’d be surprised, most of those teams are in the 30-50 range on average with their recruiting classes.

Bama, UNC, UT, UConn are the ones up top.

For what it’s worth i think this is also supposed to factor in how good the shooter is. But I’m not 100% clear on the methodology.

 

[cicero grimes]

For a minute I thought you were referring to our football program where you would not be able prove that rutgers does indeed run an offense.

 

[The RUT]

For what it’s worth i think this is also supposed to factor in how good the shooter is. But I’m not 100% clear on the methodology.

Yeah I just read through that online.

• Player's 3PT shooting ability
• Player's catch and shoot vs. off-the-dribble shooting
• Player's deep midrange shooting ability
• Player's short midrange shooting ability
• Player's driving ability
• Player's cutting ability (high-post, drop-off pass, or from screen)

• Player's isolation ability
• Player's ability curling off a screen for a jump shot
• Player's FT%
  1. Single Bonus vs. Double Bonus
• Player's free throw rate
• Player's turnover rate
• Shot Distance

• Defender Closeout
• Interior Defense
• Blocked Shots
  1. Incorporating the likelihood of an offensive rebound or foul drawn
• Elimination of Half-Court Shots
• Percent chance of Offensive Rebound based on shot type and shot distance

Not quite the metric I’m looking for, this kinda just tells us we’re bad at things we already know we’re bad at.

 

[RUDivision]

Saw that plenty until this year. In fact Pike is known for his inbounds plays. And Paul, Ron, Geo, Calb, Cliff were excellent at the pick and roll and pick/dunk backdoor. Excellent.

That those teams were ranked 247 offensively! Better players will score more in ISO situations which will make the offense appear better. The offense scheme , off ball movement, and ability to create open looks has been horrible under Pike. He needs to hire an offensive minded coach.

 

[Eagleton96]

That those teams were ranked 247 offensively! Better players will score more in ISO situations which will make the offense appear better. The offense scheme , off ball movement, and ability to create open looks has been horrible under Pike. He needs to hire an offensive minded coach.

Disagree. There rankings of the players correlate well with the offensive ranking of the team. There is no evidence to suggest it's anything else.

 

[RUDivision]

Disagree. There rankings of the players correlate well with the offensive ranking of the team. There is no evidence to suggest it's anything else.

Ok, Pike has had a decade with multiple players and teams at RU and has yet to run an effective efficient offense. Starts at the top

 

[Shelby65]

To the people that say "Rutgers doesn't run an offense" do you think the coaches just send the guys out there and tell them to play? Or do you not like the stuff Rutgers runs? Like, is it really that you guys think they just go out there like a group of guys at LA fitness?

Actually, yes. There's damn little structure to the offense outside of alley oops to Cliff after winning the opening tip and the two double screens to GG for corner jumpers on inbounds plays.

The rest of our offense, if you want to call it that, is "go beat your defender". Occasionally JWill was able to do that....no one else on the team had that ability.

 

[Eagleton96]

Ok, Pike has had a decade with multiple players and teams at RU and has yet to run an effective efficient offense. Starts at the top

Your comment gets to the heart of unrealistic expectations. Pike had a decade, starting with nothing, and has shown steady growth across all metrics, including recruiting. Culminating in the #2 recruiting class this year...and we will watch what happens with the portal shopping in the next month. That shows a coach OVER PERFORMING.

Look, the expected trajectory for a coach coming into a bottom feeding program is to stay bottom feeding. Being a bottom feeder was a reflection on our reputation, our facilities, our fanbase, our finances...not just on the coach.

Given the players Pike had, due to the program's general position, what kind of offense would have been acceptable to you? How many rungs above our expected outcomes, based on the programs status and the players we had, would have been good enough for you?

 

[RUDivision]

Your comment gets to the heart of unrealistic expectations. Pike had a decade, starting with nothing, and has shown steady growth across all metrics, including recruiting. Culminating in the #2 recruiting class this year...and we will watch what happens with the portal shopping in the next month. That shows a coach OVER PERFORMING.

Look, the expected trajectory for a coach coming into a bottom feeding program is to stay bottom feeding. Being a bottom feeder was a reflection on our reputation, our facilities, our fanbase, our finances...not just on the coach.

Given the players Pike had, due to the program's general position, what kind of offense would have been acceptable to you? How many rungs above our expected outcomes, based on the programs status and the players we had, would have been good enough for you?

Extremely fair take but also a leading problem with our fan base and how we view our school, conference, program etc.

I agree from a program perspective Pike has done a great job getting it respectable.

Venue top 5 to play in. Nil payed for that recruiting class. School and location top notch. Conference big time!

He is 30 games under 500 in the conference bad in big games,( Big ten tournaments, NCAA, NIT). Jayden Jones highest recruit never saw the floor left after one year. Gavin zero development and transferred after one year. Long term program players Mag transferring.

Pike’s tenure quickly closing

 

[AdventureHasAName]

Your comment gets to the heart of unrealistic expectations. Pike had a decade, starting with nothing, and has shown steady growth across all metrics, including recruiting. Culminating in the #2 recruiting class this year...and we will watch what happens with the portal shopping in the next month. That shows a coach OVER PERFORMING.

Look, the expected trajectory for a coach coming into a bottom feeding program is to stay bottom feeding. Being a bottom feeder was a reflection on our reputation, our facilities, our fanbase, our finances...not just on the coach.

Given the players Pike had, due to the program's general position, what kind of offense would have been acceptable to you? How many rungs above our expected outcomes, based on the programs status and the players we had, would have been good enough for you?

I just want the team to do basic things that freshman high school teams are expected to do:

Box out
Make (and practice) free throws
Three or four inbound plays
Motion on offense with a purpose (not just two man game that devolves into hero-ball or dribbling out the clock and shooting a contested three)
Players who cannot make 3 pointers are not allowed to shoot 3 pointers
If an opposing player is in foul trouble, we intentionally go at him until he is out of the game
If you don't have any scorers on the court, run ... push the ball on every defensive rebound

I don't think these things are unreasonable. I realize Pike's only been here a decade, but these are things that get addressed in the second week of freshman high school basketball practices for a couple hundred high schools in the country every year. There is no doubt in my mind, if we focused on these things offensively, we'd win three or four games minimum every year.

 

[Bobbydigital_83]

Breaking news.....a myth is being debunked with actual evidence that doesn't support the fans who think "RU doesn't run an offense etc..."....In order to make such a wild claim, shouldn't there actually be evidence supporting that item??

Here are the actual facts....there have been 5 known or relevant RU players in recent years who hit the portal.....and in almost all of them, the players produced at the same level OR their efficiency or production went DOWN after leaving RU. I won't bore you with the stats, the 5 players are

Myles Johnson
Montez Mathis
Jacob Young
Paul Mulcahy
Eugene Omoyuri

The argument that Eugene somehow learned offense at Oregon after a full redshirt season, while learning how to actually play basketball without doible dribbling as a freshmen, is pretty funny. So take Eugene out and all 5 players saw most of their efficiency or numbers decrease after leaving RU....that doesn't support the "RU doesn't run an offense, if others are doing it elsewhere, why aren't those players and their numbers increasing......HMMMM

Let's take a more recent comparison, since others claim that UConn "adjusted their offense.....they did not.....they adjusted and shed poor guards who were 4* kids and weren't efficient like Rashool Diggins (Umass) and Corey Floyd Jr (Providence)....which brings me to the horrible part of Cam Spencer....don't look, you may be shocked

Spencer stats for the most part are identical to last year, which collpases any argument about coaching, offense or anything, because Spencer numbers should be WAY better at UCONN, right?? WRONG.....

He averaged 10 shot attempts per game last year at RU....same 10 shot attempts per game at UConn this year

From 3.. .Spencer shot 43.4 at RU....he shooting 44.0 at UConn...

PPG 14.4 at UConn.....13.2 at RU...

Same minutes per game....31.5 RU, 32.7 UConn...

89.4 FT at RU, 91.5 at UConn with the same number of attempts per game (not a lot)

4.5 RPG at UCONN, 3.8 at RU

3.6 AST at UCONN to 3.1 at RU

Once I factor in that UConn is the overwhelming favorite and Spencer has the best roster kr supporting cast, does that support the argument on "Pike doesn't run good offense"??

I'll wait to see where the drastic difference in production is, to support that argument. The fact is, it is NOT a lack of coaching, it is talent on the floor.

If fans want to bang poor recruiting, go for it.....but if a 4th and 5th year senior season for Cam Spencer is essentially the same, the argument is essentially useless.

Citing Cam Spencer stats shows me you lack critical thinking that needs to accompany stat analysis. At Rutgers, Cam was our Number 1 option, At Uconn what option is he? Is there a large drop-off from scoring options 1,2,3 etc....? Does he have to create his own shot there? Anybody with eyes could see we have no real structure on offense. The stats show me that Cam did his thing INSPITE of RU's offensive issues and he was extremely efficient and disciplined.

Maybe just maybe our offense is decent and we just need shooters, but the point remains that our system doesn't make players perform better than there ability. A system enables easier shots/looks, I didnt see that

 

[RUDivision]

Saw that plenty until this year. In fact Pike is known for his inbounds plays. And Paul, Ron, Geo, Calb, Cliff were excellent at the pick and roll and pick/dunk backdoor. Excellent.

He’s known to be horrible at his inbounds plays. Paul leaving thankfully corrected that. Penn state at home ND in play in game (Paul n pike were horrible at inbounding the ball)

 

[Eagleton96]

I just want the team to do basic things that freshman high school teams are expected to do:

Box out
Make (and practice) free throws
Three or four inbound plays
Motion on offense with a purpose (not just two man game that devolves into hero-ball or dribbling out the clock and shooting a contested three)
Players who cannot make 3 pointers are not allowed to shoot 3 pointers
If an opposing player is in foul trouble, we intentionally go at him until he is out of the game
If you don't have any scorers on the court, run ... push the ball on every defensive rebound

I don't think these things are unreasonable. I realize Pike's only been here a decade, but these are things that get addressed in the second week of freshman high school basketball practices for a couple hundred high schools in the country every year. There is no doubt in my mind, if we focused on these things offensively, we'd win three or four games minimum every year.

So you’re ignoring pikes reputation as having teams with strong rebounding in fundamentals prior to this year? You don’t think they practice free throws? Your post is complete nonsense. Are you in opposing teams fan spreading discord here?

 

[RUDivision]

So you’re ignoring pikes reputation at Rick strong rebounding in fundamentals prior to this year? You don’t think they practice free throws? Your post is complete nonsense. Are you in opposing teams fan spreading discord here?

Why are Pikes team Always a bad FT shooting team? Regardless of roster? Just a coincidence clearly not his fault

 

[Eagleton96]

Why are Pikes team Always a bad FT shooting team? Regardless of roster? Just a coincidence clearly not his fault

Um, weak shooting players as a result of recruiting realities.

 

[RUDivision]

Um, weak shooting players as a result of recruiting realities.

So he recruits bad FT and 3 pt shooting? Ok clearly not his fault ! 😆