Shooting
- Thread starter PatrickRU92
- Start date
Yup. But I really liked Pikiell's game plan. Tough D, foul a lot because they can't hit free throws, rotate multiple big men to do all the fouling, try to have it close late and then steal the game. All that happened but the last part. Because of . . . . you said it, shooting. He can coach his butt off, but only recruiting will really fix the shooting problem.
aside from a few poor decisions, we do EVERYTHING well except shoot (which is a pretty big thing to be missing)
Our lack of perimeter game was why we lost.
Our lack of perimeter game was why we lost.
Definitely appreciate what gettys adds, but replacing him with Baker next yeafmay end up as a net gain as far as wins simply since we're so desperate for shootimg
Could not believe it was 9-6 SHU after nine minutes. Close late--coaches had to be pleased with the effort. But we need a sniper or two.
Maybe Baker can help.
TL
Maybe Baker can help.
TL
Patrick you say this same thing every year...and you're right every year. For once we have size, athleticism, depth, and a good coach, but still lack shooting
It's just silly isn't it? Its basketball. The object of the game is to shoot the ball through the hoop. Yet we are up to probably 23 out of 25 years where we simply can't do it.
It's almost like playing football and not having a QB :grimace:
Inside players failing to finish around the basket also were reasons for losing.Bottom line Carrington and Delgado were the best players on the court and they play for Seton Hall..
we missed a few chippies but the inside guys will get better looks if we pull the defense a little farther outside the paint. We are so easy to defend--just don't let us get good position down low and we won't be able to scores
I was watching the game with my daughter we are a couple of sharpshooters away from being a very good club next year
Of course we need shooters. EVERYBODY needs more shooters. What did SHU shoot from 3? Defense con mute good shooting.
My question is what would have been the outcome had we hit a couple of those gimmies we missed (SA, Freemna, CJ); had we committed a typical # of turnovers instead of 20+ ?
My question is what would have been the outcome had we hit a couple of those gimmies we missed (SA, Freemna, CJ); had we committed a typical # of turnovers instead of 20+ ?
not necessarily important what SHOE's percentage was. The difference is on defense we had to account for Carrington, Powell, and the 2 other dudes whose names I don't care about who are good shooters. That makes Delgado's job far easier and when he got the ball on the blocks one-on-one I think he scored every time.
Its the THREAT more than anything thats important.
Well, if you wanna see what THAT'S like just watch film of Rutgers football 2015 and 2016.
You can't run any kind of effective offense if you can't shoot. Good teams will chew you up and spit you out with defense.
Coach Pikiell ,fans and opponents know Rutgers strengths and weaknesses.The lack of scorers/shooters is at the top of the list of the weakness column.I prefer citing team weaknesses rather than individual flaws such as inside players failure to finish around the basket.Such language identifies a team weakness rather than a individual.
Its up to the coaching staff to work on player improvement.Some of the flaws can be corrected and others can't because of size , lack of athleticism,and skills like shooting.
Its up to the coaching staff to work on player improvement.Some of the flaws can be corrected and others can't because of size , lack of athleticism,and skills like shooting.
