Starting Point Guards...B1G Points Per Game

[fluoxetine]

Indiana, Illinois second half , Michigan , Minnesota plus the last minute of Minnesota , Penn State ( almost cost us the comeback as well as his whole wretched game ).

Paul Mulcahy did not cost us our full loss margin at Indiana, and wasn’t even bad against Michigan or Illinois (singling out half the game is not valid, last I checked they count the first half).

I already gave Minnesota (though he’s not the only player who did it)

We didn’t lose to Penn State, almost losing doesn’t matter.

 

[RUChoppin]

There are estimates of this kind of stuff for college as well, and players like Zach Eddy (#1 in this category this year) are estimated to be worth like 7 points per 40 over a generic replacement.

Implicit in all of these arguments, by the way, is that Pike is a complete idiot since he only played this supposedly super-elite player for 25 minutes per game.

You keep standing up that "super elite" straw man, but nobody ever buys it (except hawk, I guess).

It's not that one "elite" player was replaced by an average player. It's that we went from a solid seven player rotation that could switch 1-4 to a six player rotation that can only really switch 1-3.

It matters what player gets the time at what position. Replace an above average center with an average point guard, and you're going to see a bigger drop than the "replacement player" numbers anticipate.

We don't have a lot of skill set redundancy. Asking Palmquist to fill the role of Mag is like asking him to fill the role of Mulcahy or McConnell. He's just not a post presence.... nor is he a distributor, or a shutdown defender.

He's a one dimensional three-point specialist, on a team not designed feature a 3-point specialist. We haven't yet been able to reimagine ourselves to find much success with a different combination of skill sets.

 

[RUBlackout]

Every time someone is double-teamed, someone is open. Knowing who is open is the key for a quick pass to foil the defense. Sometimes, when Cliff gets the ball down low, the defensive player shades him toward the center of the lane to defend his "hook shot". When the move to center lane doesn't materialize, a player comes from the other side of the lane along the baseline for the double team. There will be an opening somewhere on that far side. Could be the man in the corner. If a defender higher up in the lane drops down to cover the corner/baseline player, then the offensive player out by the far 3pt. line will be open unless a higher defender shifts over to guard there, and then, the offensive player at the top of the 3pt. line will likely be open. The pass beats the feet.

This would require people to move without the ball. Mag was great at this. Caleb is decent. Hyatt is a statue along with Palmquist

 

[goru7]

Odd, in your first sentence you say I’m wrong and then all of your next claims support my point. They used to be able to hide Paul on D and now without Mag they can’t hide him any more. That’s what you said too. Do you even read what you type ? That’s for agreeing despite thinking you weren’t.

No I didn’t . I said Paul’s defense has always been bad but Caleb and Mag mostly made up for it with their team defense. Now they cannot.
I emphasized for you Mag’s loss on the offensive end was tremendously significant and you said no that Paul’s defense is the issue. Listen PAUL’s defense isn’t good but it is his offense that has gone in the tank the last 8 games since MSU second half and that is hurting us 10x more than his defensive or failing to block out and get a key rebound failures.
So no I wasn’t agreeing with you at all. Since I almost never agree with anything you say because I wonder about your Bb IQ.

 

[fluoxetine]

You keep standing up that "super elite" straw man, but nobody ever buys it (except hawk, I guess).

It's not that one "elite" player was replaced by an average player. It's that we went from a solid seven player rotation that could switch 1-4 to a six player rotation that can only really switch 1-3.

It matters what player gets the time at what position. Replace an above average center with an average point guard, and you're going to see a bigger drop than the "replacement player" numbers anticipate.

We don't have a lot of skill set redundancy. Asking Palmquist to fill the role of Mag is like asking him to fill the role of Mulcahy or McConnell. He's just not a post presence.... nor is he a distributor, or a shutdown defender.

He's a one dimensional three-point specialist, on a team not designed feature a 3-point specialist. We haven't yet been able to reimagine ourselves to find much success with a different combination of skill sets.

It’s not a straw man. I get that people aren’t literally saying in words that he was super elite, but the point impact they claim he had is the impact of a super elite player.

Even without the words “super elite”, the same basic argument applies.. if Mawot Mag is the single handed difference between our January performance and our February performance, what kind of drugs was Steve Pikiell doing when he decided to sit him for 15 minutes a game??

The fact of the matter is that you need a lot of shit to go wrong in order to have a performance difference that large, and no one player is capable of doing it. Mag, a guy who like 30% of the board shouldn’t even start remember, was the most obvious change so everyone fixates on it but
Mag is out
Paul is playing like shit (possibly injured?)
Caleb has been injured
Our FT shooting went to shit
Hyatt has not been playing well (and wasted his one great effort on the Nebraska game)

You add ALL of that together, and we’ve been like 9 points a game worse. You have people claiming Mag alone is worth 10

 

[goru7]

It’s not a straw man. I get that people aren’t literally saying in words that he was super elite, but the point impact they claim he had is the impact of a super elite player.

Even without the words “super elite”, the same basic argument applies.. if Mawot Mag is the single handed difference between our January performance and our February performance, what kind of drugs was Steve Pikiell doing when he decided to sit him for 15 minutes a game??

The fact of the matter is that you need a lot of shit to go wrong in order to have a performance difference that large, and no one player is capable of doing it. Mag, a guy who like 30% of the board shouldn’t even start remember, was the most obvious change so everyone fixates on it but
Mag is out
Paul is playing like shit (possibly injured?)
Caleb has been injured
Our FT shooting went to shit
Hyatt has not been playing well (and wasted his one great effort on the Nebraska game)

You add ALL of that together, and we’ve been like 9 points a game worse. You have people claiming Mag alone is worth 10

It is not due to his difference in points alone ( 16-22 from the 4 spot alone , compared to 8-14 now ) but the intangibles he brought and what Pike is able to do offensively and defensively and to do it efficiently and effectively. I am sure you can find it among your data but we were #2 in the country in defensive efficiency behind Tennessee with Houston right there as well. The only reason we were # 2 was the elite defense which started with our elite press which Mag owned and no one has replaced. How many more turnovers, deflections caused leading to offensive run outs and uptempo for our offense ? That is a huge difference than his half court offense contribution which is still below where we were with him but not significantly .
You cannot measure his rebounding loss coupled with his help of Cliff solidifying our half court defense. Again not a data point.
But the data without him defensively for these last 8 games has to be significantly different and worse in terms of 2 point and 3 point % defense. Even though we have had some decent defensive efforts in these last 8 games , there are no elite performances like Indiana, Maryland and Penn State or Wake Forest for that matter. Those were super super elite defensive performances that even the stats do not do enough justice to describe the domination. We had MaG for all 4 of them. We pressed elitely in all 4 of them or we doubled(Mag) TJD to his worst game of the year. Stats do not tell the whole story. That is all we are trying to say , that some things are not quantifiable or do not show up on a stat sheet but coaches know and respect and try to game plan around and they still cannot do it.

 

[Nycrusupporter]

You keep standing up that "super elite" straw man, but nobody ever buys it (except hawk, I guess).

It's not that one "elite" player was replaced by an average player. It's that we went from a solid seven player rotation that could switch 1-4 to a six player rotation that can only really switch 1-3.

It matters what player gets the time at what position. Replace an above average center with an average point guard, and you're going to see a bigger drop than the "replacement player" numbers anticipate.

We don't have a lot of skill set redundancy. Asking Palmquist to fill the role of Mag is like asking him to fill the role of Mulcahy or McConnell. He's just not a post presence.... nor is he a distributor, or a shutdown defender.

He's a one dimensional three-point specialist, on a team not designed feature a 3-point specialist. We haven't yet been able to reimagine ourselves to find much success with a different combination of skill sets.

People keep talking about defense. We are holding teams below 60 points a game with poor shooting percentages. Our defense even with Mag out has been fine. The problem is the entire team is shooting poorly and turning the ball over a ton. We have been losing because our offense has been embarrassing.

 

[Degaz-RU]

The numbers per game are not any more "advancing an opinion ", than the nonsense that the team collapsed because of Mag being out.....and it's no more of a guess than to try and connect the Mulcahy struggles directly to Mag not being there. The same player played a solid game at Wisconsin and scored 17 2nd half points in the same game where Mag was lost to injury.

I keep seeing no substantial data points beyond Mulcahy and the lack of productivity as the sole and primary/overwhelming reason for 2-6.

And the numbers support that not having your starting PG go multiple games without a FG in the 1st half of games, is not ideal.

The Mag item without mentioning Mulcahy and the dropoff is a lazy and unsupported take, with NO supporting documentation. The least you can do is simply state the case with data that exceeds the 5PPG drop off with Mulcahy's production.

I've already stated that Hyatt, Palmquist and others can make up for Mag's loss.

And I am pointing to Simpson because his numbers, if expanded beyond 18 minutes a game, is not a large leap that he will have more numbers.

If there's clear data that Mag's loss is worth 8 to 10PPG, then you'll be correct (it's not, full stop).

One, I never said that Mag’s absence is what caused Mulcahy’s swoon, nor did I point to Mag wile ignoring Mulcahy. In fact, I said in my post that I believe Mag’s injury and Mulcahy’s poor play were BOTH “major causes” of our 2-6 finish.

Two, I’m primarily responding to your assertions that Mag’s injury had little to do with our 2-6 finish, while Mulcahy’s poor play was THE primary (“overwhelming”) cause (your 15-85 percent theory). There’s just NO empirical evidence to support your theory or your percentages, which you’re basically just pulling out of your arse.

Three, your assertion that “Hyatt and Palmquist” replace Mag’s production is downright wrong and frankly laughable. Hyatt was already the other half of our “4” rotation before Mag’s injury, and he hasn’t really increased his production (offensive and defensive) since Mag’s injury despite an increase in minutes. Palmquist has been a spot up shooter who has probably averaged 4 ppg in these 8 games. And Hyatt and Palmquist don’t come close to replacing Mag’s toughness, defense, rebounding, and efficiency.

 

[RUDivision]

Clearly , Paul Mulcahy has killed is the last 8 games , Yes scoring 5.5 points per game for a starting point guard or any damn starter is killing us. But you are blind if you do not see the MAG loss as massive. He not only was scoring 10 points a game over his last 7 games and was about to score his 9th point when he got hurt with 5:25 left in the first half, Hyatt was coming off the bench for 6-12 points. So we were getting 16–22 from the 4 spot. Why are we scoring 43 and 53 points against Michigan and NW at home and only around 60 on the road during this stretch , because we are missing MAG offensively. Not to mention his press defense which was elite , his help defense with Cliff and the rest of the team , his offensive rebounding , almost non existent now and defense rebounding . Our depth and rotations have been abysmal.

Now Paul and to a lesser extent Caleb because of injuries have struggled offensively as starting BIG 10 guards. I expected each to score 10 points a game. The number of times I have looked up midway through a game and see 1 or both have 0 or just 2 points. , is way too often , and clearly why we are losing . Cam also hasn’t done enough to make up the slack . Derek has been a spark these last 2-3 games but not enough to offset the starters lack of offensive production. If we still had Mag then Derek ‘s points with Mag’s points keep us in these games.

Derek has also caused a serious defensive problem. He has gotten in his stance instead of putting pressure on opposing point guards and it has literally killed us and cost us 10 points in each of the Michigan and Northwestern games. Boo Buie threw 5 lobs to Nickerson for dunks because Derek gave too much space and never fought over 1 screen. Pup McDaniel did the same thing in the Michigan game and hit 4-5 midrange shots. Derek defended most of them along with Cam. That costs 10 points in each game. So although we need Derek’s offense , breakdown ability , we need his defense to

People keep talking about defense. We are holding teams below 60 points a game with poor shooting percentages. Our defense even with Mag out has been fine. The problem is the entire team is shooting poorly and turning the ball over a ton. We have been losing because our offense has been embarrassing.

Defense over last 8 to your point 65.5 points which is on par and good not great but our press has been non existent for a while. Yes Mag is a part of that but the biggest reason is Mccaffrey gave everyone the blue print in breaking our press by incorporating the center Rheaburaca(sp) so they are now pressing 4 on 5 big man center of the court just above the foul line for our opponents Cliff on the other end of the floor. Can’t press when they have the numbers. Pike yet to address and don’t know if he can because Cliff can’t guard in space .

Mag out and all of these wonderful analytics and efficiency numbers. When a starter goes down and Mag was a solid contributor and definitely helped us present matchup issues to our opponents it is on the remaining starters to step up and produce at a higher level giving you 50-75 percent of the injured players production back. 2 seniors Paul and Caleb and Caleb guarding 1-5 had been pulling his weight while being hurt and All Big Ten Preseason player in Cliff. Let’s stop with Oskar and Hyatt although he has been bad of late as well.

With the PM for Simpson and efficiency and who’s better or more productive well if your going to use spread sheets and calculate those numbers, which I find very cool but completely flawed to what actually is going on during the games. Easiest quick example re watch the first half of the NW game . Simpson in inserted Into the lineup and spends the entire time of his first half minutes buried in one of the corners where a shooter should be. Oskar Hyatt Cam. In the last 1:45 of the half Pike finally let’s Simpson come get the ball iso top of the key. He goes on to score two quick buckets and drops a ball into cliff at the rim for a layup. 6 points 1:45 game time. He is ball dominant dribble drive player. If you don’t allow him to have the ball then don’t even bother putting him on the court . So if you want to go back and calculate Simpson on the ball top key and off the ball in catch and shoot position with minutes and production at both then you will get an accurate picture of the big delta between the 2 point guards. I hear Simpson problem defensively agreed, needs to put on weight gets lazy on fighting through screens but Paul is equally been terrible on Defense, partly because he is guarding bigger players. Shooting well Simpson shoots the ball better then Paul and far better from the FT line. And dribble penetrate that’s not even close .

So we have 2 point guard playing bad defense
2 struggle shooting outside but one numbers are better
1 shoots far better from the free throw line
1 is the head and shoulders above on dribble drive and leaving around the rim

Our defense over the last 8 is avg giving still very good and I personally would rather the upside of the offensive production possibilities when used properly on the court over the lack of defense that plaques them both. Oh I also heard he does not distribute well I agree but that’s the same problem for Paul which is neither their fault who is going to knock down those shots? Paul gets more assist in his post play no doubt but with all of his extra minutes the delta on the assists would favor Simpson if he played those minutes and handled the ball as much as Paul

 

[jerseybird]

This would require people to move without the ball. Mag was great at this. Caleb is decent. Hyatt is a statue along with Palmquist

The Rutgers team always plays their best basketball when the players move and the ball moves.

 

[Shelby65]

It’s not a straw man. I get that people aren’t literally saying in words that he was super elite, but the point impact they claim he had is the impact of a super elite player.

Even without the words “super elite”, the same basic argument applies.. if Mawot Mag is the single handed difference between our January performance and our February performance, what kind of drugs was Steve Pikiell doing when he decided to sit him for 15 minutes a game??

The fact of the matter is that you need a lot of shit to go wrong in order to have a performance difference that large, and no one player is capable of doing it. Mag, a guy who like 30% of the board shouldn’t even start remember, was the most obvious change so everyone fixates on it but
Mag is out
Paul is playing like shit (possibly injured?)
Caleb has been injured
Our FT shooting went to shit
Hyatt has not been playing well (and wasted his one great effort on the Nebraska game)

You add ALL of that together, and we’ve been like 9 points a game worse. You have people claiming Mag alone is worth 10

? What’s the source of ‘Paul may be injured’

? Same source as I’m a female Cuse and PSU fan

Average IQ of this group is a -1.0 z-score on fluxxie’s bell curve chart.

 

[fluoxetine]

? What’s the source of ‘Paul may be injured’

? Same source as I’m a female Cuse and PSU fan

Average IQ of this group is a -1.0 z-score on fluxxie’s bell curve chart.

I mean his shoulder is definitely bothering him but no idea what effect it's having on his game. But also that's not a particularly important part of my post.

 

[Shelby65]

I mean his shoulder is definitely bothering him but no idea what effect it's having on his game. But also that's not a particularly important part of my post.

What do your charts say is the p of your opinions being accurate ? .95 ha ha !

 

[fluoxetine]

What do your charts say is the p of your opinions being accurate ? .95 ha ha !

Your troll game is weakening.

 

[Nycrusupporter]

Defense over last 8 to your point 65.5 points which is on par and good not great but our press has been non existent for a while. Yes Mag is a part of that but the biggest reason is Mccaffrey gave everyone the blue print in breaking our press by incorporating the center Rheaburaca(sp) so they are now pressing 4 on 5 big man center of the court just above the foul line for our opponents Cliff on the other end of the floor. Can’t press when they have the numbers. Pike yet to address and don’t know if he can because Cliff can’t guard in space .

Mag out and all of these wonderful analytics and efficiency numbers. When a starter goes down and Mag was a solid contributor and definitely helped us present matchup issues to our opponents it is on the remaining starters to step up and produce at a higher level giving you 50-75 percent of the injured players production back. 2 seniors Paul and Caleb and Caleb guarding 1-5 had been pulling his weight while being hurt and All Big Ten Preseason player in Cliff. Let’s stop with Oskar and Hyatt although he has been bad of late as well.

With the PM for Simpson and efficiency and who’s better or more productive well if your going to use spread sheets and calculate those numbers, which I find very cool but completely flawed to what actually is going on during the games. Easiest quick example re watch the first half of the NW game . Simpson in inserted Into the lineup and spends the entire time of his first half minutes buried in one of the corners where a shooter should be. Oskar Hyatt Cam. In the last 1:45 of the half Pike finally let’s Simpson come get the ball iso top of the key. He goes on to score two quick buckets and drops a ball into cliff at the rim for a layup. 6 points 1:45 game time. He is ball dominant dribble drive player. If you don’t allow him to have the ball then don’t even bother putting him on the court . So if you want to go back and calculate Simpson on the ball top key and off the ball in catch and shoot position with minutes and production at both then you will get an accurate picture of the big delta between the 2 point guards. I hear Simpson problem defensively agreed, needs to put on weight gets lazy on fighting through screens but Paul is equally been terrible on Defense, partly because he is guarding bigger players. Shooting well Simpson shoots the ball better then Paul and far better from the FT line. And dribble penetrate that’s not even close .

So we have 2 point guard playing bad defense
2 struggle shooting outside but one numbers are better
1 shoots far better from the free throw line
1 is the head and shoulders above on dribble drive and leaving around the rim

Our defense over the last 8 is avg giving still very good and I personally would rather the upside of the offensive production possibilities when used properly on the court over the lack of defense that plaques them both. Oh I also heard he does not distribute well I agree but that’s the same problem for Paul which is neither their fault who is going to knock down those shots? Paul gets more assist in his post play no doubt but with all of his extra minutes the delta on the assists would favor Simpson if he played those minutes and handled the ball as much as Paul

I actually don’t like the excessive full court pressing. It is a gimmicky defense that never works well against good offensive teams. An elite point guard can easily dribble through it, and good teams can pass through it and create mismatches on the other end. It is one of the reasons you never see anyone full court press in the NBA.

 

[RUChoppin]

People keep talking about defense. We are holding teams below 60 points a game with poor shooting percentages. Our defense even with Mag out has been fine. The problem is the entire team is shooting poorly and turning the ball over a ton. We have been losing because our offense has been embarrassing.

We're holding teams to fewer points by slowing the pace - which also means fewer opportunities for us to score, which is part of the reason why we've also been struggling to break 60.

Through the MSU game at MSG, our AdjD was 85.3, good for 2nd best nationally. But over the last 8 games, it's dropped to 97.4 (58th nationally). We're allowing more points per possession than we had been, and our offense has been scoring fewer per possession (our ADj0 had been 103.6 and dropped to 101.2)... but the delta on defense is worse than the delta on offense, and that's coming mostly from 2P range.

 

[RUChoppin]

It’s not a straw man. I get that people aren’t literally saying in words that he was super elite, but the point impact they claim he had is the impact of a super elite player.

Even without the words “super elite”, the same basic argument applies.. if Mawot Mag is the single handed difference between our January performance and our February performance, what kind of drugs was Steve Pikiell doing when he decided to sit him for 15 minutes a game??

The fact of the matter is that you need a lot of shit to go wrong in order to have a performance difference that large, and no one player is capable of doing it. Mag, a guy who like 30% of the board shouldn’t even start remember, was the most obvious change so everyone fixates on it but
Mag is out
Paul is playing like shit (possibly injured?)
Caleb has been injured
Our FT shooting went to shit
Hyatt has not been playing well (and wasted his one great effort on the Nebraska game)

You add ALL of that together, and we’ve been like 9 points a game worse. You have people claiming Mag alone is worth 10

Yes, losing a single player isn't the only cause - but it's a big one, especially because it exacerbates the other issues you mentioned.

- "Paul is playing like shit (possibly injured?)" - But we can't reduce his minutes, because we're stretched very thin at the 1-3 spots. Hyatt or Mag would usually spend some time at the SF spot each game while on the floor together, but for the last 8 games Hyatt/Palmquist have just split the 40 minutes at the PF.
- "Caleb has been injured" - He's our only 1v1 lockdown defender right now, so he again is being ridden hard. Not only does he not get much time to rest during games, when he comes off the floor we no longer have anyone who can slot into the defensive stopper role against the opposing SG/SF.
- "Hyatt has not been playing well" - But we have to ride-or-die with him, because Hyatt not playing well is still generally better than the alternative, which is Palmquist. We don't have another body to sub in for him when he's off his game.
- "Our FT shooting went to shit" - No impact here from being down a player.

Yes, ALL of it has to be added together, and the absence of one player in a vacuum isn't going to account for the dropoff - but my opinion is the lack of quality depth to absorb the loss of a starter is the single highest-impact reason (I'd estimate in the 50% range), in large part because it makes the other reasons listed more impactful than they would have been otherwise. With a fully healthy roster (or another bench player capable of producing at this level), I think we could have better weathered/mitigated the other things you mention above.

 

[RUBlackout]

I actually don’t like the excessive full court pressing. It is a gimmicky defense that never works well against good offensive teams. An elite point guard can easily dribble through it, and good teams can pass through it and create mismatches on the other end. It is one of the reasons you never see anyone full court press in the NBA.

Part of our problem is being overly aggressive going for the steals.
The press isn’t always about creating turnovers. I think we only created 1 against NW.
Instead the press is used to limit the half court offense and time a team has to execute.
Our players are OVERLY aggressive in both full and half court and kills is at times as it leaves players wide open

 

[MiloTalon13]

There are estimates of this kind of stuff for college as well, and players like Zach Eddy (#1 in this category this year) are estimated to be worth like 7 points per 40 over a generic replacement.

Implicit in all of these arguments, by the way, is that Pike is a complete idiot since he only played this supposedly super-elite player for 25 minutes per game.

Edey is worth 7 points per 40 over Wolff/Reiber?
No that’s not right

 

[fluoxetine]

Edey is worth 7 points per 40 over Wolff/Reiber?
No that’s not right

Why Wolff/Reiber? They have not been the one's picking up the majority of the minutes and they are probably worse than generic replacements.

If you imagine a team of all Edey's (not literally, but Edey quality players at every position) vs a team of all Hyatt/Simpson level players (with maybe some Palmquists on the bench), how many points do you think the Edey team is favored by? More than 35?

 

[RUChoppin]

Why Wolff/Reiber? They have not been the one's picking up the majority of the minutes and they are probably worse than generic replacements.

Because role matters. If Omoruyi had gone out instead of Mag, we'd have turned to Woolf/Reiber/Mag to make up those minutes, not Palmquist/Simpson. Even though Simpson is a better bench player than Woolf/Reiber he doesn't fit the role.

Just like you couldn't replace Shaq with JJ Reddick without completely retooling your entire offensive and defensive system. You'd replace him with another big.

 

[fluoxetine]

Because role matters. If Omoruyi had gone out instead of Mag, we'd have turned to Woolf/Reiber/Mag to make up those minutes, not Palmquist/Simpson. Even though Simpson is a better bench player than Woolf/Reiber he doesn't fit the role.

Just like you couldn't replace Shaq with JJ Reddick without completely retooling your entire offensive and defensive system. You'd replace him with another big.

But Mag is the one who went out, so how is this relevant at all?

 

[RUChoppin]

But Mag is the one who went out, so how is this relevant at all?

Because "over a generic replacement" isn't that meaningful situationally. Edey (or Omoruyi) may be worth 7 over a generic replacement.... but not over a generic replacement in his role, or more importantly an "available" replacement in his role.

 

[fluoxetine]

Because "over a generic replacement" isn't that meaningful situationally. Edey (or Omoruyi) may be worth 7 over a generic replacement.... but not over a generic replacement in his role, or more importantly an "available" replacement in his role.

Generic replacement is role agnostic. You compare both the original player and the actual player to the generic replacement. Is it 100% perfect? No. Is it useful? Yes. Does it provide some general upper bounds on how much a player like Mag can be worth? Also yes.

You, and some others, keep doing this thing where you just throw out a bunch of random small factors the models don't account for perfectly, and then throw up your hands, and then be like "well look at these factors, therefore models are useless". That's not how it works.

 

[RUChoppin]

Generic replacement is role agnostic. You compare both the original player and the actual player to the generic replacement. Is it 100% perfect? No. Is it useful? Yes. Does it provide some general upper bounds on how much a player like Mag can be worth? Also yes.

You, and some others, keep doing this thing where you just throw out a bunch of random small factors the models don't account for perfectly, and then throw up your hands, and then be like "well look at these factors, therefore models are useless". That's not how it works.

It's all just assuming spherical cows.

If you want to evaluate a given random player against all other players, it's not a bad metric. If you want to assess the actual impact of the loss of an actual player compared to his actual replacements, it's not that useful.

It's like arguing that a specific basement on a specific house couldn't possibly have been flooded, because there was only an inch of rainfall in their area.... while totally ignoring the specific circumstances of that individual house that made it prone to flooding.

 

[fluoxetine]

It's all just assuming spherical cows.

If you want to evaluate a given random player against all other players, it's not a bad metric. If you want to assess the actual impact of the loss of an actual player compared to his actual replacements, it's not that useful.

It's like arguing that a specific basement on a specific house couldn't possibly have been flooded, because there was only an inch of rainfall in their area.... while totally ignoring the specific circumstances of that individual house that made it prone to flooding.

No.

This stuff would all be relevant if I were making claims like "Mawot Mag was worth 1.346 points" or something. But I'm just providing extremely conservative upper bounds.

You can feel free to keep believing that models are invalid because they make assumptions (spherical cow model is going to give you a far better approximation of physics than just sort of staring at a cow for a while and trying to guess it's physical properties which is the equivalent of what the others, including you, are doing).

Look, you all can have fun believing Mawot Mag's injury cost us 5, 10, 50 points a game because of the "intangibles". No one has ever provided a convincing answer for why Pike was only playing such a uniquely valuable player only 25 minutes per game, or why like 30% of the board wanted to give Hyatt more of his minutes like a week before his injury. It's all obvious absurdity to anyone with any idea how to quantify this stuff, but the statistical models admittedly don't adjust for Mawot Mag's shoe size or dental surgeries so who knows, maybe they are off by 1,000%.

 

[NewJerseyHawk]

People keep talking about defense. We are holding teams below 60 points a game with poor shooting percentages. Our defense even with Mag out has been fine. The problem is the entire team is shooting poorly and turning the ball over a ton. We have been losing because our offense has been embarrassing.

No matter how many times it's been posted that we played BETTER teams in the final 8 to 9 games than the ones before that, it is impossible to get through to people. They start a narrative and it's spin control to support it.

The one opponent that it should not have mattered how well RU played on offense and defense, was the Minnesota game. It literally broke down with 2 key turnovers by Mulcahy, a vapor-lock decision by Hyatt and a 90% FT shooter missing a FT. Mix in some other coaching gaffes and RU is fine.

In any event, we are moving towards a point where the only possible way to explain that other teams had injuries to their best, 2nd or 3rd best players....none of the fans are at least willing to make a note of anyone else.....RU fans live in a vacuum....no one else in the B1G has recruited 4 or 5* kids, RU is headed to the Final Four....!!! (SARCASM, the B1G recruiting has been very good for the last 5 years, but suddenly our recruits are going to rocket past everyone else's 3 and 4 years worth of 4* recruits). When does reality actually set in that RU has to grind and earn everything.

If I documented the number of starting games missed by starters in the B1G, per team, heads would explode. These are 1st and 2nd team players in some cases and we are discussing Mawot Mag in the same sentence with these other players.

Let's stop making the excuses and accept the fact that it is up to the rest of the roster to make up the difference. We have been extremely fortunate in the Pike era where we have had injuries, but they have not cost RU the number of games lost, in comparison to other school in the B1G.

 

[RUDivision]

No.

This stuff would all be relevant if I were making claims like "Mawot Mag was worth 1.346 points" or something. But I'm just providing extremely conservative upper bounds.

You can feel free to keep believing that models are invalid because they make assumptions (spherical cow model is going to give you a far better approximation of physics than just sort of staring at a cow for a while and trying to guess it's physical properties which is the equivalent of what the others, including you, are doing).

Look, you all can have fun believing Mawot Mag's injury cost us 5, 10, 50 points a game because of the "intangibles". No one has ever provided a convincing answer for why Pike was only playing such a uniquely valuable player only 25 minutes per game, or why like 30% of the board wanted to give Hyatt more of his minutes like a week before his injury. It's all obvious absurdity to anyone with any idea how to quantify this stuff, but the statistical models admittedly don't adjust for Mawot Mag's shoe size or dental surgeries so who knows, maybe they are off by 1,000%.

I will try and explain this to you so we can stop with the analytics which are valuable information but if you never have played coached or understand the X and O’s and how to apply them they really don’t matter.

Why did Mag only avg 25 min.

8 games against bad non conference teams. Pike was playing the bench and sitting starters

4 games Mag was in foul trouble so his minutes had to be limited.

First MSU game we were down Pike was looking for a streaker shooter to get back in the game so we went with Hyatt more.

First OSU game Hyatt had a night 6-12 Pike rolled with the hot hand

Minn blowout hell Aiden played

MSU second game he got hurt

That leaves 7 game! In those games he averaged just under 31.5 minutes.

Hope that helps! And now we can move on.

 

[fluoxetine]

I will try and explain this to you so we can stop with the analytics which are valuable information but if you never have played coached or understand the X and O’s and how to apply them they really don’t matter.

Why did Mag only avg 25 min.

8 games against bad non conference teams. Pike was playing the bench and sitting starters

4 games Mag was in foul trouble so his minutes had to be limited.

First MSU game we were down Pike was looking for a streaker shooter to get back in the game so we went with Hyatt more.

First OSU game Hyatt had a night 6-12 Pike rolled with the hot hand

Minn blowout hell Aiden played

MSU second game he got hurt

That leaves 7 game! In those games he averaged just under 31.5 minutes.

Hope that helps! And now we can move on.

(1) Besides the foul trouble (being in foul trouble consistently makes you less valuable, by the way) those explanations could apply to any of our starters, and yet the others were playing significantly more minutes.

(2) the X’s and O’s thing is still a category error. Give me a computer and a few hours and I could predict professional cricket or Aussie Rules football better than a coach with no math
/programming background, despite not even really knowing the rules of those games. There are plenty of people on here (possibly including you) who can better explain or understand Mag’s impact in a qualitative sense. That doesn’t come close to making up for the massive, basic errors being made in quantifying those impacts.

 

[RUDivision]

(1) Besides the foul trouble (being in foul trouble consistently makes you less valuable, by the way) those explanations could apply to any of our starters, and yet the others were playing significantly more minutes.

(2) the X’s and O’s thing is still a category error. Give me a computer and a few hours and I could predict professional cricket or Aussie Rules football better than a coach with no math
/programming background, despite not even really knowing the rules of those games. There are plenty of people on here (possibly including you) who can better explain or understand Mag’s impact in a qualitative sense. That doesn’t come close to making up for the massive, basic errors being made in quantifying those impacts.

I simply answered your why 25 min question!

I don’t have time to explain all of the impact but your biggest flaw is taking mags minutes and applying it to any bench player. 25 percent of Mags production should come from the bench. The rest has to come from an increase production from your starters. The starters need to produce at a higher level and some have regressed. Trying to apply a starter to a bench player 1-1 or 1-many is wrong on 9 levels. You must start with the starters and there production. Easy impact for you to help you better understand and something you can watch outside of V-look ups is Howard at some point tomorrow will go with BIG! 2 centers in the game at the same time attempting to own the glass take away or deter Simpson/Paul (if he Evers try’s again) drives to the baskets and force us to shoot outside jumpers. What does Pike do??? Another day and time I can help explain.

 

[RUChoppin]

No.

This stuff would all be relevant if I were making claims like "Mawot Mag was worth 1.346 points" or something. But I'm just providing extremely conservative upper bounds.

You can feel free to keep believing that models are invalid because they make assumptions (spherical cow model is going to give you a far better approximation of physics than just sort of staring at a cow for a while and trying to guess it's physical properties which is the equivalent of what the others, including you, are doing).

Look, you all can have fun believing Mawot Mag's injury cost us 5, 10, 50 points a game because of the "intangibles". No one has ever provided a convincing answer for why Pike was only playing such a uniquely valuable player only 25 minutes per game, or why like 30% of the board wanted to give Hyatt more of his minutes like a week before his injury. It's all obvious absurdity to anyone with any idea how to quantify this stuff, but the statistical models admittedly don't adjust for Mawot Mag's shoe size or dental surgeries so who knows, maybe they are off by 1,000%.

"All models are wrong, but some are useful."

Models simplify and give approximations, and have their value in certain applications - but it's expected that they don't always line up perfectly with reality.

We didn't have a "generic replacement" player on our bench beyond our core 6 remaining players. We had Palmquist, Reiber, Woolfolk, Miller, and Chol - that's it. So arguments about "vs. generic replacement" are moot. Whether the loss was Mag or someone else, it wouldn't have mattered - we didn't have a backup on the bench that could mitigate the loss of 25 minutes from any of our starters. Instead, we got about 15 extra minutes out of Palmquist/Reiber and an extra 10 from other players already in the remaining 6-man rotation.

Lack of depth is a root cause of a lot of our issues - whether it's having to play Mulcahy 33+ min through a downturn, or having to play McConnell 34+ minutes/game with a bad back, or having to play Hyatt/Spencer through streakiness. It's less about losing Mag specifically, and more about not having a viable SF/PF backup ready to step into his role in the rotation.

Most of the factors you listed as reasons for our decline are exacerbated by "we had no other option". Not "what are we going to do without this specific amazing player"... but "there isn't really a Plan B".

We replaced the majority of a starter's minutes with a player who'd tallied just 194 minutes in 3 years, appearing in just 36 of 82 games, and who didn't have an overlapping skill set to the player he was replacing. It's not like we had sophomore-year Eugene Omoruyi on the bench to step in.

 

[Scangg]

The numbers per game are not any more "advancing an opinion ", than the nonsense that the team collapsed because of Mag being out.....and it's no more of a guess than to try and connect the Mulcahy struggles directly to Mag not being there. The same player played a solid game at Wisconsin and scored 17 2nd half points in the same game where Mag was lost to injury.

I keep seeing no substantial data points beyond Mulcahy and the lack of productivity as the sole and primary/overwhelming reason for 2-6.

And the numbers support that not having your starting PG go multiple games without a FG in the 1st half of games, is not ideal.

The Mag item without mentioning Mulcahy and the dropoff is a lazy and unsupported take, with NO supporting documentation. The least you can do is simply state the case with data that exceeds the 5PPG drop off with Mulcahy's production.

I've already stated that Hyatt, Palmquist and others can make up for Mag's loss.

And I am pointing to Simpson because his numbers, if expanded beyond 18 minutes a game, is not a large leap that he will have more numbers.

If there's clear data that Mag's loss is worth 8 to 10PPG, then you'll be correct (it's not, full stop).

Just bc you keep saying Hyatt and Oskar make up for Mag's loss doesn't make it true. It's pretty obviously not true

Just like you keep saying Hyatt is a reliable shooter when he hasn't been during his entire career. He's a career 37% and 28% from 3. That's not good at all

 

[Scangg]

The Rutgers team always plays their best basketball when the players move and the ball moves.

This. We don't have good one on one players so ball and player movement is essential bit we don't utilize it well

No matter how many times it's been posted that we played BETTER teams in the final 8 to 9 games than the ones before that, it is impossible to get through to people. They start a narrative and it's spin control to support it.

The one opponent that it should not have mattered how well RU played on offense and defense, was the Minnesota game. It literally broke down with 2 key turnovers by Mulcahy, a vapor-lock decision by Hyatt and a 90% FT shooter missing a FT. Mix in some other coaching gaffes and RU is fine.

In any event, we are moving towards a point where the only possible way to explain that other teams had injuries to their best, 2nd or 3rd best players....none of the fans are at least willing to make a note of anyone else.....RU fans live in a vacuum....no one else in the B1G has recruited 4 or 5* kids, RU is headed to the Final Four....!!! (SARCASM, the B1G recruiting has been very good for the last 5 years, but suddenly our recruits are going to rocket past everyone else's 3 and 4 years worth of 4* recruits). When does reality actually set in that RU has to grind and earn everything.

If I documented the number of starting games missed by starters in the B1G, per team, heads would explode. These are 1st and 2nd team players in some cases and we are discussing Mawot Mag in the same sentence with these other players.

Let's stop making the excuses and accept the fact that it is up to the rest of the roster to make up the difference. We have been extremely fortunate in the Pike era where we have had injuries, but they have not cost RU the number of games lost, in comparison to other school in the B1G.

We actually had the easiest or second easiest remaining schedule in the B1G down the stretch. Wisconsin PSU Nebraska Minnesota Michigan. We basically played the entire bottom of the conference. Those are 5 of the bottom 6 teams minus us

 

[RUChoppin]

For anyone interested, here's a straight comparison between our last 8 games and the 8 games prior to MSU, looking at raw totals (Note: The OSU game had an OT period, so the prior 8 games saw 25 additional minutes spread across the roster)

Teams (and bart ranking):
Last 8: @Indiana (32), Northwestern (33), @Penn St (41), Michigan (45), @Illinois (46), @Wisconsin (79), Nebraska (105), @Minnesota (211)
Prior 8: @MSU (27), Maryland (28), @Northwestern (33), Penn St (41), @Iowa (39), Iowa (39), Ohio St (59), Minnesota (211)

Minutes: Last 8 games; 8 games Prior to MSU (delta)
Mulcahy - 270; 286 (-16)
Spencer - 268; 243 (+25)
Omoruyi - 259; 241 (+18)
McConnell - 236; 269 (-33... missed one game due to injury)
Hyatt - 218; 161 (+57)
Simpson - 154; 105 (+49)
Palmquist - 107; 16 (+91)
Reiber - 47; 45 (+2)
Woolf - 33; 26 (+7)
Miller - 11; 17 (-6)
Mag - 0; 218 (-218)

We lost 218 min from Mag (injury), 33 from McConnell (injury), and 16 from Mulcahy (foul trouble). The beneficiaries were Palmquist (+91), Hyatt (+57), Simpson (+49), Spencer (+25), and Omoruyi (+18)

FGA:
Omoruyi - 89; 66 (+23)
Spencer - 80; 84 (-4)
Hyatt - 74; 63 (+11)
McConnell - 66; 75 (-9... one less game)
Simpson - 59; 32 (+27)
Mulcahy - 54; 75 (-21)
Palmquist - 22; 8 (+14)
Reiber - 12; 15 (-3)
Woolf - 2; 3 (-1)
Mag - 0, 47 (-47)

Overall, we took 12 fewer shots, all 2Ps... we shot the same number of 3P in both sets of games. But our overall FG% went down to .406 from .436). We lost 68 shots from Mag (injury) and Mulcahy (gunshy?)... and making up the gap primarily was Simpson (+27), Omoruyi (+23), Palmquist (+14), and Hyatt (+11).

FGM:
Omoruyi - 46; 33 (+13)
Spencer - 35; 32 (+3)
Hyatt - 27; 25 (+2)
Simpson - 25; 10 (+15)
McConnell - 22; 31 (-9... one less game)
Mulcahy - 17; 31 (-14)
Palmquist - 9; 5 (+4)
Reiber - 4; 7 (-3)
Woolf - 1; 3 (-2)
Mag - 0; 28 (-28)

Overall, we made 19 fewer baskets. 5 fewer threes, and 14 fewer twos. We lost 51 baskets from Mag (injury), Mulcahy (gunshy/slump), and McConnell (injury)... and made up the gap primarily with Simpson (+15), Omoruyi (13), and Palmquist (+4).

Palmquist gave us just 4 more buckets with 91 additional minutes, and Hyatt gave us just 2 more with 57 additional minutes.

Rebounds:
Omoruyi - 74; 81 (-7)
McConnell - 43; 45 (-2... one less game)
Spencer - 39; 38 (+1)
Hyatt - 33; 29 (+4)
Mulcahy - 31; 22 (+9)
Simpson - 17; 9 (+8)
Palmquist - 8; 2 (+6)
Reiber - 8; 7 (+1)
Woolf - 5; 1 (+4)
Mag - 0; 40 (-40)

Overall, we had 18 fewer rebounds... (-1 ORB, -17 DRB)


Looking at the team/opponent totals:

Rutgers:
Last 8: 481 Pts, 186/458 (.406), 258 RB (75 ORB, 183 DRB)
Prior 8: 556 Pts, 206/471 (.437), 276 RB (76 ORB, 200 DRB)

Opponents:
Last 8: 528 Pts, 192/431 (.445), 260 RB (65 ORB, 195 DRB)
Prior 8: 515 Pts, 180/450 (.400), 251 RB (72 ORB, 179 DRB)

Overall, we've slowed down the game enough for our opponents to have 19 fewer attempts, but we've allowed 12 more baskets. On our side, we've taken 13 fewer attempts and made 20 fewer baskets. We've gone from a +41 scoring margin to -47, and from a +25 rebounding margin to -2.

And this is against slightly lower overall competition.

 

[RUDivision]

Simpson

To all the haters who said he’s not a PG or should not be in instead of Paul . Please don’t post anymore. He finally for the first time was given the pg role ON THE BALL. His drives caused defenses to collapse opened up shooting and spread the floor. He got what ever he wanted and will be the answer moving forward glad PIKE finally woke up. Needs to put on weight to finish at the rim and work on 3 point shot but the only offensive athlete guard we have. Baby geo Aka THE TRUTH

 

[RU-Choppin-Ohio]

A lot of items are being placed at the feet of the coaching staff in terms of recruiting talent, lack of depth, Mawot Mag being injured but it's simply not the case.

Here are you starting B1G Point Guards and their PPG averages for the season.

13.4 INDIANA

11.3 NEBRASKA

10.0 PURDUE

9.8 MINNESOTA

8.3 MICHIGAN

16.3 MARYLAND

10.0 ILLINOIS

18 PSU

12.6 MSU

17.2 NW

10.0 OSU

12.4 IOWA

12.2 WISC

8.2 RUTGERS

I would say 8.2 is probably not the standard, but the difference between 8.2 and 12 PPG is an enormous gap in scoring in conference games.

So I just figured I know the guard play impacts the offense and RU was fine through the MSG game at MSU

Mulcahy accumulated 128 points in 1st 12 B1G games. 16 points at Purdue, 15 vs Maryland, 12 at Northwestern, 12 at MSU, 11 vs PSU at the RAC, 11 at Iowa....not all wins obviously, but games were Mulcahy was in the league average of PG production.

The last 8 games, have not been ideal, for any starting player, in any lineup, but it impacts everything, when it is your starting PG

45 points in last 8 B1G games is 5.625 PPG. RU is 2-6 obviously in the last 8 games.

Could RU easily have been 3-5 with Minnesota in the win column?? Sure, but I could easily offset that RU had no business winning at Wisconsin without Caleb playing and certainly no legitimate chance down 19 early in the 2nd half at PSU.

5.6 PPG from any starting PG is not going to win many games. It's beyond just scoring, any player can hit a shooting slump, but the overall play is so severely below B1G PG standards, that your offense is going to completely unravel.

5.6 is 3 to 4 PPG below Minnesota and their PG. If I take a closer look at Michigan's PG, Dug McDaniel in all B1G games, he is at 10 PPG.

We can discuss a bunch of items, but leaping past this wide of a gap from our PG play, vs what may be far and away the least productive PG in terms of PPG in all of the B1G, is a open and easy way to bring things to a point.

We have no real options to remedy this for the Michigan game and it's not solving everything. But the team needs a guard that can at least reach the 13th best production out of 14 teams, if we are going to remotely compete in any game.

Simpson as the starting PG would be pretty high on this list.

Your comments are too long so I don't read most of them, lol.

Were you right here ???? Start Simpson and get much more PG points

 

[Scangg]

Both Simpson and Paul played much much better. We need at least one of them to play well. If both do, we will be tough to beat

 

[NewJerseyHawk]

You can only be correct so often, that it's annoying and frustrating to see. The TEAM is responsible for making up the difference and playing a different brand of basketball.

Mulcahy had 8 PTS (3-6 shooting, 2 of 3 from 3) 5 Boards, 5 Assists, 3 TOs in 30 minutes of play....some on the ball, but most off the ball, where he can find catch and shoot opportunities.

Simpson had 13 points (6-16 shooting, all within the flow of the offense), 0-4 from 3, 1-2 FTs, 5 rebounds, 3 assists (the one curl & pass back to Spencer is what Simpson opens up) & no turnovers in 36 minutes.

When you get 20+ points and 8 assists from your primary guards that can score and distribute, it changes the dynamic of the team.

 

[RUChoppin]

Both Simpson and Paul played much much better. We need at least one of them to play well. If both do, we will be tough to beat

100% on Mulcahy/Simpson, and I loved seeing Simpson with 36 minutes. He just brought a totally different factor into the game that Michigan wasn't prepared for.

And while Palmquist didn't light up the box score, he played with a TON of heart and effort for his 19 minutes. He was out there scrapping and playing like this was his last time on the court - even after he got knocked off his feet and slammed into a Michigan player with no whistle.

Also, speaking to leaning on depth, just monster minutes from Woolf - 11 min, 6 pts, 2 rb, 1 stl and made life uncomfortable for Dickinson while Omoruyi was on the bench with foul trouble.

 

[Scangg]

100% on Mulcahy/Simpson, and I loved seeing Simpson with 36 minutes. He just brought a totally different factor into the game that Michigan wasn't prepared for.

And while Palmquist didn't light up the box score, he played with a TON of heart and effort for his 19 minutes. He was out there scrapping and playing like this was his last time on the court - even after he got knocked off his feet and slammed into a Michigan player with no whistle.

Also, speaking to leaning on depth, just monster minutes from Woolf - 11 min, 6 pts, 2 rb, 1 stl and made life uncomfortable for Dickinson while Omoruyi was on the bench with foul trouble.

Who would have thought that Oskar would contribute with defense and scrappy play? It's incredible how much better he's been defensively lately. Now if we could only find him for some open 3's, but he still spaces the court on offense and did a really good job of playing smart and not forcing things