Happy with what I saw (and heard) today!

Greene Rice FIG

Hall of Famer
Dec 30, 2005
32,471
14,962
113
I'm hoping that the relatively close score was due to not wanting to show up a favored HC and not due to focus gaps.

I'd like to see Columbia not get out of the 50s preferably the 40s.
I think there are combinations we can play to keep them in the 50s. Those combinations could keep us in the 60s.
 

RUPete

Hall of Famer
Feb 5, 2003
21,771
9,733
113
I’d be doing the opposite if we lost by 1 and the board was in complete meltdown mode thinking we wouldn’t win a B1G game
Whatever, man. You are right and everyone else is wrong. Are we good now? People are fans. Allow them some optimism in the preseason. There's nothing wrong with your takes, they are legitimate. Just don't crap on people's legitimate optimism in the process. There's room for both.
 

RUPete

Hall of Famer
Feb 5, 2003
21,771
9,733
113
I'm hoping that the relatively close score was due to not wanting to show up a favored HC and not due to focus gaps.

I'd like to see Columbia not get out of the 50s preferably the 40s.
Have you read 72's posts on Columbia? I think it's best just to get Ws in the OOC schedule and not worry about style points. Style points are for the 4-6 teams that get to play for the CFB championship every year.
 

RUPete

Hall of Famer
Feb 5, 2003
21,771
9,733
113
So what if Pike wanted to win? Why is that a bad thing? Maybe he thought the team needed to win for confidence

Not sure the logic of why Pike wanting to win would be so concerning?
And if he played it like he didn’t care about the outcome and we lost, how would this board be? Usual peanut gallery posters would come out lecturing us about why we shouldn’t be optimistic in the preseason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: njcanesfan

Scangg

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Mar 20, 2016
17,168
30,268
113
San Diego
And if he played it like he didn’t care about the outcome and we lost, how would this board be? Usual peanut gallery posters would come out lecturing us about why we shouldn’t be optimistic in the preseason.
Of course

Winning is always nice, but my reasons for being optimistic have absolutely nothing to do with the score
 

fischy5000

All Conference
Dec 11, 2008
2,560
832
113
things I saw...

Mulcahy seems like he is stepping to that leader on the floor role...heard lots of talking from him----'who's got who', etc

Liking simpson...seems like he's still got some experience to gain---being careful with foul trouble. But overall nice to see he's got a shot. He looks to be able to be a slasher and with the speed he seems to have reminds me of Jacob young defending up top or on press.

had multiple moments thinking we need to work on defending the 3. Could just be the gameplan from this specific game though. Guys were quick to try and close out, but were sometimes too far away to make a difference.

havent seen cliff in person in a while but he seems to have gotten more filled out body shape. He's got good form for foul shots but hopefully he can keep up a decent percentage as i think he'll get to the line alot. Nice that he seems to have a touch from 3. Would be a nice option when it arises.
Little nervous about our situation if cliff gets in foul trouble vs any quality big men. although i think some of the offensive rebounds Fairfield got down low were from helpers leaving their men and then not as much help on the helper...unless it was just some switching issues.

Seems like Jalen miller is still a bit behind on the offensive end and maybe that's why he didnt play as much in the Fairfield game?

team pulled out the full court pressure a few times and seemed to execute it pretty well. we'll def see more of that!

while Cam's shot wasn't in full sync in this game, he still got in for some driving shots which i think will start to fall. Nice to see those attempts and not just settling for the outside shot. Also seems to have body type to back defender in similar to what Paul does sometimes.

Woolfolk looks like he will be able to contribute right away. Not sure if he's at the point of #1 option on the offensive side, but def has nice size to get some offensive boards and putbacks and maybe some short shots on dump offs, pick and rolls (didnt see much else while he was out there on the court). With his frame hopefully he'll be able to become a nice big body on defense.

Mag looked really active out there! If he can get his outside shot to hit consistently that will be a big plus for the team.

I agree about other comments in the thread about the rest of the guys.

Also, on a separate note---the hotdog tasted good and the guys behind the counter were fast 😁
 

Greene Rice FIG

Hall of Famer
Dec 30, 2005
32,471
14,962
113
Whatever, man. You are right and everyone else is wrong. Are we good now? People are fans. Allow them some optimism in the preseason. There's nothing wrong with your takes, they are legitimate. Just don't crap on people's legitimate optimism in the process. There's room for both.
No soup for you!
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUPete

Greene Rice FIG

Hall of Famer
Dec 30, 2005
32,471
14,962
113
Right. I'm still not sure what correlation that would have to team quality though.
Pike’s probability of victory equation Has a very strong correlation to Mulchay’s minutes. Which would mean if he doesn’t play a lot chances of losing goes down which doesn’t say a lot about rest of team.

how about that?
 

BillyC80

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2006
12,004
8,349
113
Not really, Pike said he was treating it as a dress rehearsal and a real game. If that was his intent, it makes sense. All the starters played major minutes. Helps make sure they have the cardio and legs for a full real game so there is that

I probably wouldn't have approached it that way, but that's a different question
This^. Start with the fact that Caleb is out for an unspecified number of games. Dean and Jalen are coming back from injuries. Chol just got here. So Pike had to see what the remaining 8 guys could give him, to get ready for the season opener.

Six of those 8 guys played 20+ minutes, and Woolfolk played 7 minutes. The only DNP was Oskar. Some of us may wanna complain that Palm and Woolf should have played (more), but I don’t have a problem with how Pike handled it.
 

Scangg

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Mar 20, 2016
17,168
30,268
113
San Diego
things I saw...

Mulcahy seems like he is stepping to that leader on the floor role...heard lots of talking from him----'who's got who', etc

Liking simpson...seems like he's still got some experience to gain---being careful with foul trouble. But overall nice to see he's got a shot. He looks to be able to be a slasher and with the speed he seems to have reminds me of Jacob young defending up top or on press.

had multiple moments thinking we need to work on defending the 3. Could just be the gameplan from this specific game though. Guys were quick to try and close out, but were sometimes too far away to make a difference.

havent seen cliff in person in a while but he seems to have gotten more filled out body shape. He's got good form for foul shots but hopefully he can keep up a decent percentage as i think he'll get to the line alot. Nice that he seems to have a touch from 3. Would be a nice option when it arises.
Little nervous about our situation if cliff gets in foul trouble vs any quality big men. although i think some of the offensive rebounds Fairfield got down low were from helpers leaving their men and then not as much help on the helper...unless it was just some switching issues.

Seems like Jalen miller is still a bit behind on the offensive end and maybe that's why he didnt play as much in the Fairfield game?

team pulled out the full court pressure a few times and seemed to execute it pretty well. we'll def see more of that!

while Cam's shot wasn't in full sync in this game, he still got in for some driving shots which i think will start to fall. Nice to see those attempts and not just settling for the outside shot. Also seems to have body type to back defender in similar to what Paul does sometimes.

Woolfolk looks like he will be able to contribute right away. Not sure if he's at the point of #1 option on the offensive side, but def has nice size to get some offensive boards and putbacks and maybe some short shots on dump offs, pick and rolls (didnt see much else while he was out there on the court). With his frame hopefully he'll be able to become a nice big body on defense.

Mag looked really active out there! If he can get his outside shot to hit consistently that will be a big plus for the team.

I agree about other comments in the thread about the rest of the guys.

Also, on a separate note---the hotdog tasted good and the guys behind the counter were fast 😁
We are in better shape this year at the 5 than last year.

This year's Cliff >>> last year's Cliff major upgrade. If Cliff gets in foul trouble...

This year's Dean >>> last year's Dean

Woolfolk >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Agee
 

Scangg

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Mar 20, 2016
17,168
30,268
113
San Diego
Pike’s probability of victory equation Has a very strong correlation to Mulchay’s minutes. Which would mean if he doesn’t play a lot chances of losing goes down which doesn’t say a lot about rest of team.

how about that?
You're really just reaching to be negative.

OBVIOUSLY playing Mulcahy is correlated to winning. He's a 6'8 PG who was honorable mention All B1G last year and lead the conference in assists

It's like saying playing Cliff is correlated with us winning 😮🤯 mind blowing analysis

For Iowa, playing Murray is correlated with winning

These are just really pointless obvious takes
 

Greene Rice FIG

Hall of Famer
Dec 30, 2005
32,471
14,962
113
You're really just reaching to be negative.

OBVIOUSLY playing Mulcahy is correlated to winning. He's a 6'8 PG who was honorable mention All B1G last year and lead the conference in assists

It's like saying playing Cliff is correlated with us winning 😮🤯 mind blowing analysis

For Iowa, playing Murray is correlated with winning

These are just really pointless obvious takes
My post was in direct response to flux. It was made in jest.
 

Degaz-RU

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Dec 19, 2002
16,805
12,558
113
We were basically playing without 3 members of our 9-man rotation, one of whom is the DPOY (and our best pound for pound rebounder by the way), one of whom is a defensive stopper, and one of whom should be part of our front court rotation.

Perhaps the absence of said players impacted our play on the court?
 
  • Like
Reactions: shields

Greene Rice FIG

Hall of Famer
Dec 30, 2005
32,471
14,962
113
Greene is going to be the optimist in the room in a month probably lol
I really hope not. I’d love to be a convincing 4-0 after Temple and everyone ganging up on me and making fun of me and how worried I was.

I’ll still provide analysis why our hot start was fools gold and we have to wait until B1G schedule to come to any conclusions
 
Nov 3, 2015
1,710
1,687
113
Just finished watching the game on B10+. My impressions:

- Fairfield is good, so this was a good test for RU.
- Most pleasant surprise was Hyatt. I know Mag is currently the 4, but Hyatt earned major PT if this game was the only indicator. He is a better offensive player than Mag and Hyatt had a very nice defensive game.
- Simpson didn't play like a frosh and will probably be first guard off the bench.
- The team will be even more high energy when Caleb returns.
- We'll need to see how Dean's PT plays out. Not making anything out of his limited time in this game. Same with Miller.
- Cam needs to hit his shots. If not, he comes off the bench.
- Remember when free throws was an issue? Two years ago? Nice that it is not a significant concern any longer.
- Without Caleb it's impossible to project how this team will do.
 

RUtrumpet92

All American
Feb 5, 2003
9,330
6,429
113
Negatives
Hyatt too many defensive lapses
Cam passing up shots (could be jitters)
Chol no where near ready defensively
If one of our top negatives is a late signee that most of us knew nothing about just three months ago isn't ready on D, I would say that's a positive for our team overall.

Beat Columbia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scangg

Scangg

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Mar 20, 2016
17,168
30,268
113
San Diego
So we outperformed expectations without Caleb? Seems like a good sign
Not if you're reaching for any reason to be negative 🤣

20 assists to 9 TOs
46 points in the paint
19 fast break
24 points off turnovers

A lottt to like this game. Most of it not in the stats. The eye test of everyone was so bullish. The unselfishness and passing was much better. The ball didn't stick un anyone's hands. More movement. Players like Cam and Mag cut a lot instead of standing around
 
  • Like
Reactions: JMD77

Scarlet Blind

All Conference
Aug 5, 2001
3,361
3,147
113
47
Maybe the rotation of players/B1G roster was more about helping his friend of many years, Jay Young, getting prepared for his out of conference schedule, Wake and Xavier are 2 of their first 3 games, since Fairfield probably doesn't have the resources to find quality "secret scrimmages" and this exhibition helps Fairfield more playing Rutgers starters longer.
 

Greene Rice FIG

Hall of Famer
Dec 30, 2005
32,471
14,962
113
Man it's like everyone gets amnesia in the off-season and forgets how FIG approaches his analysis and commentary.
I might have a character flaw where I get agitated when people don't look at both sides. I honestly thought we won by 30 because the 1st thing I read about the game was this original post.

The season may go like the consensus thinks. There are so many unknowns. Players playing different roles. New players in the uniform. Anyone with conviction in any direction is delusional.

I watched only the 1st half. There was a ton not to like, but there was a bunch to like.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gregkoko

Scangg

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Mar 20, 2016
17,168
30,268
113
San Diego
I might have a character flaw where I get agitated when people don't look at both sides. I honestly thought we won by 30 because the 1st thing I read about the game was this original post.

The season may go like the consensus thinks. There are so many unknowns. Players playing different roles. New players in the uniform. Anyone with conviction in any direction is delusional.

I watched only the 1st half. There was a ton not to like, but there was a bunch to like.
Again focusing on the score
 

RutgHoops

All American
Gold Member
Aug 14, 2008
6,318
10,563
113
I might have a character flaw where I get agitated when people don't look at both sides. I honestly thought we won by 30 because the 1st thing I read about the game was this original post.

The season may go like the consensus thinks. There are so many unknowns. Players playing different roles. New players in the uniform. Anyone with conviction in any direction is delusional.

I watched only the 1st half. There was a ton not to like, but there was a bunch to like.

You know better than most that college basketball games are not decided by 30. And certainly not against teams ranked in the top 200.

Here were some of the biggest OOC losses for MAAC teams last year:

Rider: 24 @Mississippi
St. Peters': 19 @ St. Johns
Iona: 13 Kansas (neutral court)
Niagara: 10 @Ohio State
Fairfield: 8 @BC, and they lost by 7 @PC (I reiterate they aren't bad)
Monmouth: 5 @St Johns, they beat Cincy @UC

I can go on. The MAAC is not a bad conference and Fairfield is one of the better teams in that league. Heck, the MAAC had a team go to the Elite 8 a year ago. Anyone looking to beat this team by 30 is not following CBB closely enough.
 
Last edited:

Greene Rice FIG

Hall of Famer
Dec 30, 2005
32,471
14,962
113
You are misunderstanding!!!!

I had zero expectations going in to this game. If I really thought about it I probably would have said RU by 10.

After reading the initial post on THIS thread I thought we won by 30. I didn't know the score. The 1st information I recieved about the scrimmage was this post where it sounds like we are the 1985-86 Boston Celtics.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RutgHoops

nukem

Senior
Gold Member
Feb 4, 2003
1,787
3,685
113
I might have a character flaw where I get agitated when people don't look at both sides. I honestly thought we won by 30 because the 1st thing I read about the game was this original post.

The season may go like the consensus thinks. There are so many unknowns. Players playing different roles. New players in the uniform. Anyone with conviction in any direction is delusional.

I watched only the 1st half. There was a ton not to like, but there was a bunch to like.
How about the character flaw of you coming on to this board and vehemently arguing with people non stop when you didn't even watch the game initially? It just shows you have some sort of agenda and/or just like arguing for the sake of arguing with people. I'm sorry, but that's just an ignorant thing to do.
 

Scangg

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Mar 20, 2016
17,168
30,268
113
San Diego
If you want one sided views of Rutgers basketball you should put me on ignore.
People are saying they want views from people who actually watched the game. Its a very reasonable take

It's not like you had one passing comment. You posted relentlessly arguing when you had no idea what you were talking about having not watched. It's pretty ridiculous
 

RUtrumpet92

All American
Feb 5, 2003
9,330
6,429
113
I see value in digging into statistics/box scores too, but it cannot tell the full story. Remember the quote attributed to Mark Twain (who attributed it to Benjamin Disraeli) about "lies, damned lies, and statistics." It is an overreach to make judgments on our season's prospects from an exhibition game box score without watching the game, too.

Now I am going to be a hypocrite by raising questions about some things in the box score despite not seeing the game. :)

Mag had more FGA than anyone else. That makes me a little uneasy if this becomes a regular season trend until he proves it. Hitting only 6 of 15 is not a sign of a guy with a hot hand being fed by his teammates. Question: did he seem to be forcing bad shots, or just not having a good day finishing? Desperation shots late in the shot clock?

Mulcahy with four FGA plus four FT, so he attempted six shots max (if he was fouled while shooting twice). I hope he is more selfish than that against higher level competition this season. Previous years, it feels like his performance was worse when teams were playing him to pass and he obliged, leading to turnovers rather than taking more shots himself. I hope this was an exhibition-driven shot volume. Still, I love the 10:2 A:TO ratio.

Only nine total turnovers is a very encouraging stat.

For all the talk of Woolfolk looking the part and being a big guy, one rebound in seven minutes isn't a lot. What's the story there?

FT shooting of 73.7% is a fair number, not a strong one. I won't say we've turned a corner on that until we see it in more games. That % would've been around rank 101 last season. We were 70% last year, so we were really only one miss/make away from that # in this game.

I love seeing 19 fast break points. I am concerned about only 14 bench points, and that was pretty much just Simpson. Granted this should improve when we get Caleb and Dean back. Last year's lack of bench scoring was a huge weakness.
 

Degaz-RU

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Dec 19, 2002
16,805
12,558
113
I see value in digging into statistics/box scores too, but it cannot tell the full story. Remember the quote attributed to Mark Twain (who attributed it to Benjamin Disraeli) about "lies, damned lies, and statistics." It is an overreach to make judgments on our season's prospects from an exhibition game box score without watching the game, too.

Now I am going to be a hypocrite by raising questions about some things in the box score despite not seeing the game. :)

Mag had more FGA than anyone else. That makes me a little uneasy if this becomes a regular season trend until he proves it. Hitting only 6 of 15 is not a sign of a guy with a hot hand being fed by his teammates. Question: did he seem to be forcing bad shots, or just not having a good day finishing? Desperation shots late in the shot clock?

Mulcahy with four FGA plus four FT, so he attempted six shots max (if he was fouled while shooting twice). I hope he is more selfish than that against higher level competition this season. Previous years, it feels like his performance was worse when teams were playing him to pass and he obliged, leading to turnovers rather than taking more shots himself. I hope this was an exhibition-driven shot volume. Still, I love the 10:2 A:TO ratio.

Only nine total turnovers is a very encouraging stat.

For all the talk of Woolfolk looking the part and being a big guy, one rebound in seven minutes isn't a lot. What's the story there?

FT shooting of 73.7% is a fair number, not a strong one. I won't say we've turned a corner on that until we see it in more games. That % would've been around rank 101 last season. We were 70% last year, so we were really only one miss/make away from that # in this game.

I love seeing 19 fast break points. I am concerned about only 14 bench points, and that was pretty much just Simpson. Granted this should improve when we get Caleb and Dean back. Last year's lack of bench scoring was a huge weakness.
Re: Mag - all of his shots were “good” shots in the flow of the offense. He missed several close in shots/bunnies, so it was more an issue of him not finishing as well as he should.

Mulcahy was RESPONSIBLE for 27+ points if you combine his points (7) and assists (10). It’s probably more than 27 because I’m pretty sure he assisted on a couple of threes. I would take a combination of 25 to 30 “responsible-for” points from Paul every night.

I’m also taking 74% FTs every night.

As for the 14 bench point (12 of which were from Simpson), bear in mind that Caleb did not play, so that pushed Hyatt into the starting lineup. Hyatt would’ve been coming off the bench, so there would’ve been more bench scoring. Also, Reiber only played 2 minutes, and I believe Pike held him out for injury reasons.
 

wheezer

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Jun 3, 2001
35,612
16,361
113
I did not see this exhibition game, but will give you an opinion on early season play

to me, it often looks like our perimeter defense, stopping a quick guard from penetrating, is suspect early on, and looks concerning

this usually is remedied in short order, but three point defense a longer term problem, a quick passing team hitting the open 3 Persists

you can always count on the defense getting better as time goes on

just a general observation over the years
 
  • Like
Reactions: fatsam98

Scangg

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Mar 20, 2016
17,168
30,268
113
San Diego
I see value in digging into statistics/box scores too, but it cannot tell the full story. Remember the quote attributed to Mark Twain (who attributed it to Benjamin Disraeli) about "lies, damned lies, and statistics." It is an overreach to make judgments on our season's prospects from an exhibition game box score without watching the game, too.

Now I am going to be a hypocrite by raising questions about some things in the box score despite not seeing the game. :)

Mag had more FGA than anyone else. That makes me a little uneasy if this becomes a regular season trend until he proves it. Hitting only 6 of 15 is not a sign of a guy with a hot hand being fed by his teammates. Question: did he seem to be forcing bad shots, or just not having a good day finishing? Desperation shots late in the shot clock?

Mulcahy with four FGA plus four FT, so he attempted six shots max (if he was fouled while shooting twice). I hope he is more selfish than that against higher level competition this season. Previous years, it feels like his performance was worse when teams were playing him to pass and he obliged, leading to turnovers rather than taking more shots himself. I hope this was an exhibition-driven shot volume. Still, I love the 10:2 A:TO ratio.

Only nine total turnovers is a very encouraging stat.

For all the talk of Woolfolk looking the part and being a big guy, one rebound in seven minutes isn't a lot. What's the story there?

FT shooting of 73.7% is a fair number, not a strong one. I won't say we've turned a corner on that until we see it in more games. That % would've been around rank 101 last season. We were 70% last year, so we were really only one miss/make away from that # in this game.

I love seeing 19 fast break points. I am concerned about only 14 bench points, and that was pretty much just Simpson. Granted this should improve when we get Caleb and Dean back. Last year's lack of bench scoring was a huge weakness.
Agree with Degaz responses

Re Woolfolk. It wasn't his stats. What was so impressive was just how athletic and smooth he looked. He just moves so well for a man his size. He also looked excellent covering the perimeter, hedging and recovering etc.

He had active hands and played good defense in the post leading to a steal