ADVERTISEMENT

Here is the reality on "running an offense ".....

I would’ve ran pick and roll with Ace and Dylan all day with 2 out of Martini, Acuff, PJ, or Grant on the wings to shoot 3s. But oh well.

Williams, Davis, and Derkack just created alot of redundancy and took the ball out of mostly Dylan’s hands but Ace, as well. Made no sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUDivision
Breaking News: Career sub 25% 3pt shooters aren't a threat from 3

If HC Pike and staff wanted shooters then he would recruited them.

This is why it's a system and staff problem first - then a player problem second.
That's why he brought in Martini and Hayes but both busted. If even one was a legit 3 point weapon it would have made a difference
 
That's why he brought in Martini and Hayes but both busted. If even one was a legit 3 point weapon it would have made a difference

2 bench players? That was the great shooting hope?

As opposed to JWill, Derkack, Davis, Grant, Dortch and Acuff.

Is was possible to consider surrounding Ace, Dylan and our low post centers with multiple shooters at one time.

Not even including Lathan/Ogbole (although many other teams have centers who can at least make a 3 on occasion. Lathan is 1-7 and Ogbole never took one.)
Hoping for a shooting threat a center is just a bridge too far.
 
not to steal @rutgersal playbook.....they probably didn't have to.

The Derkack "signing" was the biggest head scratcher. Guy comes from a program that plays zone and has a big sample size of being a bad shooter. He is a terrible fit. He is a terrible defender AND he can't shoot.
and may lead the league in being rejected by a backboard.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: AdventureHasAName
According to your chart, Michigan State guards only have 5 more made 3s than ours. Yet MSU is 20-5 . By the way, they definitely do run an offense
The cornerstone of Izzo's system at Michigan State has always been based on converting tough defense and rebounding into easy baskets in transition. In general, their guards (and all of their other players) are much better finishers at the rim. They are among leaders in fast break points in the B1G. That's why they're 20-5 despite the fact that their guards have only 5 more made threes than the guards on a team that's under .500.
 
Last edited:
There are only 2 people on our roster that can create their own shot with regularity. A “real” system would allow for the rest not to rely on iso and an athletic advantage to get a realistic opportunity to score. There aren’t many on our roster that are going to out athletic anyone. But we do have shooters that can produce if given the “right” opportunity. Either coming off of a screen, spotting up or beating someone threw off ball movement. Our offense is stand in the corner and watching one person come off horns and hope that person either has a shot or gets so far into the shot clock that he has to pass for a last ditch attempt. We have multiple transfers that produces in “real motion systems”. Be it they are at lower levels but Princeton, San Diego, eastern Michigan, Merrimack all pretty much run a semblance of a motion offense.

And I agree Pike did a horrible job filling in the roster this year. Dercack,PJ and Acuff all have similar skill sets and fill a similar role. You take 1 or 2 but not all 3.
No, Derkack and PJ have no skill on either end. Don’t group Acuff with them.
 
The cornerstone of Izzo's system at Michigan State has always been based on converting tough defense and rebounding into easy baskets in transition. In general, their guards (and all of their other players) are much better finishers at the rim. They are among leaders in fast break points in the B1G. That's why they're 20-5 despite the fact that their guards have only 5 more made threes than the guards on a team that's under .500.
You make a very good point about the fact that they view almost every possession as an opportunity to run the floor. That coaching staff is on point when it comes to adjusting to personnel
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT