Heading this sort of thing now in year 2 is fine . But if we are still hearing it after losses in year 4-5 then that’s a problem . Slow and steady progress.
Izzo: "Steve's done a heckuva job with this program."
- Thread starter RU848789
- Start date
College offenses aren't simply going to get guys "open looks" by virtue of their design. Just doesn't work that way. Example 1 would be how many "open looks" did Michigan State get last night? Think Coach Izzo knows how to design an effective offense?
What you want a college offense to do, at its most basic level, is get your best player(s) in either:
What you want a college offense to do, at its most basic level, is get your best player(s) in either:
- 1 on 1 situations where the offense player can drive and score and/or drive and kick
- Pick and roll situations where the offense player can drive and score and/or drive and kick/dish to the rolling screener
- Isolated post situations
Last edited:
After our HC has more than ONE class he recruited (in a full recruiting cycle) on the roster?
its not Corey bashing. but yeah, he played like crap again on the O side of the game.You play each game as its own entity. I don't care what somebody's history is. I care that Mike was 2 for 7 and one of only couple guys making shots last night. Mike had 2 more points (8 vs. 6) in less than half the shots (7 vs. 15).
Then why was every jump shot made by Bridges last night off of a double screen?
Sanders has no reliable offensive option. How can the season depend on him? Also, he makes really half effort passes. Defensively, he might be the best there.
Sorry, but I don't see it. The season is going to depend on someone with more reliability. Baker is a freshman, but I think he has shown to be a leader of this team. He handles the ball well, sees good passes, and gives a lot of effort. You know who also agrees that he leads the way?Pikiell. Baker is leading the team in minutes.
The double screen was a design to get Bridges into a one on one situation with Thiam. A matchup Coach Izzo felt was to his advantage. Did you watch the game and think Bridges was getting open threes/shots? Or was Bridges getting into a matchup off those screens that he could take advantage?
Last edited:
Sanders and to a slightly lesser degree Baker are the only two players who in an offensive set can either create their own shot or set up a teammate for a good shot. The success of this season (however anyone wants to define "success") very much depends on Corey.
You have pretty much summed up why I am bearish on the '17-'18 season. For all the warts he has this team desperately needs him on the court.
We were in a no win situation. Williams is better equipped to fight through screens, but doesn't have length. Thaim's length was effective vs. bridges but he cant get through screens. Some of bridges 3s i just laughed at.
They do. But to think that it all depends on him? I am just not seeing the numbers to support it.
This here lies the problem. Sanders still forces the majority of his shots, and does not find team mates at the rate he should. He needs to focus in on his offensive game, the basics, to have the effect he could have. Right now, his best offensive move is driving and trying to shoot over three people. It's a circus shot, lol.
No one would be happier to see Sanders succeed. I appreciate the kid and what he has been through. He really needs to focus in though.
I texted a good buddy of mine who is also a college hoops junkie a Carmelo comp on Bridges last night. He is that good.
Izzo was interviewed pre-game and said "Pike is one of the best coaches in America". I doubt he's just saying that. He respects Pike because RU looks like an early version of MSU.
Huh? No they double screened Thiam so Bridges could get an open look
Bridges got wide open threes after double screen when Rutgers play man. Bridges was shooting as Thiam tried to fight through the second screen. The 3 made but defended well wasn’t a double.
As other posters here have said, to neutralize Thiam’s length they often double screened him knowing he struggles to fight through one screen much less 2 such as they did early in the 2nd half off of an inbounds pass.
The coach-speak is meaningless.
"I give Eddie Jordan credit,'' Izzo said 11 words into his post-game press conference. "The way those guys came out and played the first half ... he had his guys ready to play. I tip my hat off to them.''
Then, Izzo was asked: What does Jordan have to do to get the Rutgers program up and running?
"Well from my vantage point Eddie's gotta stay healthy,'' Izzo said, pointing to the numerous injuries that has resulted in Rutgers playing some games with as few as six scholarship players. "When you have all those injuries early and then your confidence goes and then you suspend a guy for four games, I think they have do what we did, do what everybody did (and) you gotta upgrade their facilities. But he's gotta stay healthy.
"It's a shame. I thought they'd be a better team this year ... but it's hard to evaluate when you're losing guys for the year. They run some really good stuff. Offensively they are hard to guard. I think offensively he is a very good coach. I really think Eddie can turn this program around.''
Then, Izzo was asked: What does Jordan have to do to get the Rutgers program up and running?
"Well from my vantage point Eddie's gotta stay healthy,'' Izzo said, pointing to the numerous injuries that has resulted in Rutgers playing some games with as few as six scholarship players. "When you have all those injuries early and then your confidence goes and then you suspend a guy for four games, I think they have do what we did, do what everybody did (and) you gotta upgrade their facilities. But he's gotta stay healthy.
"It's a shame. I thought they'd be a better team this year ... but it's hard to evaluate when you're losing guys for the year. They run some really good stuff. Offensively they are hard to guard. I think offensively he is a very good coach. I really think Eddie can turn this program around.''
While I take your overall point, you are overstating it greatly. College offenses most certainly are run, either off of concepts or set plays, to get players point blank or open looks. Back door cuts, lobs, drive and dish to either the three point line or the center on the other side of the paint, various out of bounds plays, all designed not just to get players in an advantageous position as you say, but if run correctly, an open look. Takes smart, dedicated players to do it consistently, however.
You are correct. And I was oversimplifying/overstating my point. The overall point is college basketball isn't played for 40 minutes with the goal to run a specific play to get a specific open look on each possession down the floor. We don't get to huddle up before each offensive trip. :smiley:
As someone who played a bit of college ball back in the day, the idea as I very much oversimplified, is how an HC will instill in the players the "goals of the offense" in a broad sense (unless you happen to play for Princeton). How teams get to those "basics" has much variation but the goals remain similar across the country.
While you will have some backdoor concepts/ lob concepts/different screen packages you get about 60-70 offensive possessions in a typical college game and I guess my overarching point is you aren't running 60-70 "different plays", but rather running different sets to get your best players in the most advantageous positions.
Last edited:
Absolutely. Running scripted offense can get teams that aren't good at it to play rigid and turn the ball over. On the flip side, teams with poor instincts, passing, and court vision don't excel at finding good shots in the flow of an offense, either. Rutgers has to keep working on both aspects, to say the least. My number one goal right now if I'm Pikiell is getting Sanders confident that he can drive the hoop and make layups again, because he's a mess right now.
30 second shot clock has made more of a reliance on simple screens at the expense of working the defense and getting multiple reversals.
I hate what it has done to the college game.
I hate what it has done to the college game.
I was impressed with the ability for you guys to take away transition points and limit points on the paint. Nothing came easy.
Spartan fan here. Your defensive game plan and execution was very good. And the team played hard to the end. That's good coaching. I was impressed.
Clearly RU was emphasizing transition defense and it worked. What amazed me, was we were still able to stay even in rebounding against an outstanding rebounding team.
Similar threads
