Change it to winning was the primary objective.What does it mean to "need" a W in an exhibition game? Do you need a W more in an exhibition game if you are not confident in your team?
Change it to winning was the primary objective.What does it mean to "need" a W in an exhibition game? Do you need a W more in an exhibition game if you are not confident in your team?
I think there are combinations we can play to keep them in the 50s. Those combinations could keep us in the 60s.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.
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.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
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.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.
So what if Pike wanted to win? Why is that a bad thing? Maybe he thought the team needed to win for confidenceChange it to winning was the primary objective.
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.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?
Of courseAnd 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.
Right. I'm still not sure what correlation that would have to team quality though.Change it to winning was the primary objective.
No soup for you!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.
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.Right. I'm still not sure what correlation that would have to team quality though.
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.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
We are in better shape this year at the 5 than last year.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 😁
You're really just reaching to be negative.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?
My post was in direct response to flux. It was made in jest.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
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.Greene is going to be the optimist in the room in a month probably lol
So we outperformed expectations without Caleb? Seems like a good signFWIW Bart would have had us favored by 10.
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.Negatives
Hyatt too many defensive lapses
Cam passing up shots (could be jitters)
Chol no where near ready defensively
Not if you're reaching for any reason to be negative 🤣So we outperformed expectations without Caleb? Seems like a good sign
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.Man it's like everyone gets amnesia in the off-season and forgets how FIG approaches his analysis and commentary.
Again focusing on the scoreI 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.
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.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.
People are saying they want views from people who actually watched the game. Its a very reasonable takeIf you want one sided views of Rutgers basketball you should put me on ignore.
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.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 responsesI 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.