Always the first guy out on court to celebrate a W. Gotta love the guy!
Palmquist
- Thread starter RutgersClassof2004
- Start date
Gotta also love a guy who goes 4-6 from 3. If Oskar and Hyatt can combine for 11-17 from 3 in regular season games, RU should have a pretty good season 😎
Hopefully we continue taking lots of 3s
Huge disadvantage last season taking so few of them
My rough estimate on Palmquist from 3:
Early in shot clock , stepping into the shot: 45%
Late in shot clock: 32%
Play run for Oskar: 35% (small sample)
Corner 3: 35%
Open floor 3: 40%
Our guards haven't always put him in the best shooting position, but if you're a bench guy getting less than 8 minutes per game, you can't expect too much tailoring to suit you. I don't see how he will get much better this year. I think he can change some of his approach to defending bigger players and improve that way.
Early in shot clock , stepping into the shot: 45%
Late in shot clock: 32%
Play run for Oskar: 35% (small sample)
Corner 3: 35%
Open floor 3: 40%
Our guards haven't always put him in the best shooting position, but if you're a bench guy getting less than 8 minutes per game, you can't expect too much tailoring to suit you. I don't see how he will get much better this year. I think he can change some of his approach to defending bigger players and improve that way.
With our 3 point shooting last year we took enough. This year should be different.
The disadvantage was that Spencer was the only somewhat consistent 3 point scoring threat on the court last season.
Much of that had to do with the fact that Rutgers ran more plays for Spencer. Others were lucky to get a play (3pt) called for them.
It would have been a worse disadvantage taking more and making them at a low percentage.
The faster our guard push the ball after securing the rebound, there are shots available early in the shot clock with Palmquist, Griffiths running to an open spot from 3.
The question is going to be is RU willing to play defense for 25 to 30 seconds and then take an early transition 3, only to have to play more defense for another 25 to 30 seconds?? Only if you have improved the backcourt, the footspeed and can apply pressure to the opposing guards.
I am not advocating playing like Iowa, but Iowa was or has been able to assign just 1 ballhawk (Joe Toussaint as an example) on the lead guard and speed up their opposition. That led to other Iowa players getting into more shot attempts.
The ideal situation is you have 10 to 11 very good players like Michigan State, with 4 to 5 of them, being plus defenders on the ball. They provide the most consistent example of how they generate turnovers or pressure on the ball and then get secondary shots in transition.
Palmquist (maybe Chol), Griffiths along with Hyatt getting a lot of 3s, is a signal that we can get cheap baskets before a defense gets set. The guard play supplements and expands the limitations of the forwards from having to generate their own offense off the dribble. Palmquist needs to defend and rebound better, to allow his shooting to help RU. We can't have a situation where Palmquist missing shots AND doesn't play good enough defense, results in an overall complete negative player across the board.....
RU had too many net-negative players on last year's roster, where if those players missed shots or didn't score enough, those players couldn't generate defensive pressure to do anything else well. Palmquist has enough time in the system to improve defensively now, it's up to him (and Hyatt more specifically), to find ways to improve on defense. Hyatt does rebound, Palmquist needs to step it up too.
The question is going to be is RU willing to play defense for 25 to 30 seconds and then take an early transition 3, only to have to play more defense for another 25 to 30 seconds?? Only if you have improved the backcourt, the footspeed and can apply pressure to the opposing guards.
I am not advocating playing like Iowa, but Iowa was or has been able to assign just 1 ballhawk (Joe Toussaint as an example) on the lead guard and speed up their opposition. That led to other Iowa players getting into more shot attempts.
The ideal situation is you have 10 to 11 very good players like Michigan State, with 4 to 5 of them, being plus defenders on the ball. They provide the most consistent example of how they generate turnovers or pressure on the ball and then get secondary shots in transition.
Palmquist (maybe Chol), Griffiths along with Hyatt getting a lot of 3s, is a signal that we can get cheap baskets before a defense gets set. The guard play supplements and expands the limitations of the forwards from having to generate their own offense off the dribble. Palmquist needs to defend and rebound better, to allow his shooting to help RU. We can't have a situation where Palmquist missing shots AND doesn't play good enough defense, results in an overall complete negative player across the board.....
RU had too many net-negative players on last year's roster, where if those players missed shots or didn't score enough, those players couldn't generate defensive pressure to do anything else well. Palmquist has enough time in the system to improve defensively now, it's up to him (and Hyatt more specifically), to find ways to improve on defense. Hyatt does rebound, Palmquist needs to step it up too.
I think it's a higher level argument.
We need to not put ourself in a situation where we need to limit 3s because shooting more is a disadvantage.
Luckily it seems we've built the roster differently (prioritizing offense a bit more) going forward with Fernandes, Griffith, Bailey, likely Harper.
I can already hear the football arguments "We can't pass more. We have to rely on the run because that's the stronger unit. Passing more will just be worse."
The solution is to build the roster (and system) such that we attempt to avoid this situation unless as a last resort.
Well I agree, it would be an advantage to have a roster with more 3 point shooting ability, provided they can D up.
However last year we didn’t have many of those folks. And some with glaring issues shooting.
Hence… me being a smart ass. I couldn’t resist that one.
