This chart is an indictment of the defense. 48 points in the paint. We scored 82 points against them when their avg is 70 pts allowed.
This shot chart is a total indictment of steve pikiells lack of an offense
- Thread starter KK1827
- Start date
Including 5-18 at Wesleyan, now under .500 in his 20 year career as a head coach. And if you combine the Big East and the Big 10 you have 27 teams I believe. He and Ben Johnson (4 seasons) at Minnesota are the only two head coaches with career losing records.
Last edited:
Funny that shot chart taking out the 3 misses by Jeremiah, JMike , Lathan down the stretch looks rather similar. Our 3 point shooting was proper and had points in the paint not enough and less than Michigan, thank Manny for that .
By there are plenty of teams that can thrive on making 2 point shots and taking 3’s on kick outs and when wide open. If Ace and Dylan shoot 20 2’s I am hoping at least 10 maybe 12-14 go down. The reason it doesn’t look like enough is our bad defense leaves t teams in games or we lose leads that any adequate defense played would have turned the losses into wins.
I must be in minority but basketball offense that just takes threes and chippies by the basket is not the game I grew up loving and playing.
Now many are concerned about efficiency when they should be focused on made buckets wherever on the court and making stops at the other end. That’s a solid combo to win games.
I looked at that chart and thought to myself “RU was taking and making baskets from all over the court while Mich just made threes and layups.”
This the basketball many watching the NBA want to stop seeing.
GO RU
Now many are concerned about efficiency when they should be focused on made buckets wherever on the court and making stops at the other end. That’s a solid combo to win games.
I looked at that chart and thought to myself “RU was taking and making baskets from all over the court while Mich just made threes and layups.”
This the basketball many watching the NBA want to stop seeing.
GO RU
It just comes down to math. You're going to make more buckets closer to the basket than farther.... but if you get far enough, the buckets are worth 50% more. A "heels on the line" jumper gets made at the same rate as a shot 10" farther back, but is worth less.
Unless there are no other options, the area 0-5 ft inside the three-point line should be a "no shot zone".
The assist to point ratio has been a problem all year. We have a person that is supposed to be our point guard that has a career apg of 2. Yes 2 from a point guard. That herein lies the issue. Our offense is not geared to distributing the ball to a scorer via the pass. It is not built on distributing rather it is built upon pounding the ball into the floor for 20 seconds than hoisting an ill advised shot.
Agreed. If the shot selection was equally distributed and had some tendencies that carried over from game to game for Rutgers. But that is not what we are seeing in that chart. As was touched upon in this thread and many over the years. You know what Michigan and NBA offenses are trying to do. Michigan is getting easy buckets at the rim via execution and willfully passing and assists. They are also shooting 3’s mostly due to an inside out look.
We on the other hand are boosting shots with little to no predictability or execution other than iso. We have very little assists per scoring per game.
Two possessions for each team. One makes a three and misses a three. The other makes two 2 pt shots.
There’s the math.
GO RU
That ignores the FG% differences based on distance. Two attempts at the rim go in more often than two attempts with heels on the arc, which is why you want both 2pt and 3pt attempts to be made as close as possible to the hoop.
A toes behind the line three has a higher hit rate than one taken from mid court, though they are worth the same points. You don't want people routinely putting up half court shots, unless there is no other option. Same goes for 2pt shots at 2 ft versus 20 ft.
Last edited:
Except a 14 or 15 foot 2 point shot that goes in 50% to 60% with Dylan and ACE shooting them , lots of them with occasional kick out 3’s and wide open 3’s on penetration will beat a team that relays on a 3 point shot too much. The 2 point shot is not dead just watch Brunson on the Knicks , Shai on the Thunder , Cade Cunningham on Detroit. If we had a rim protector that strategy would have won a lot more games and I mean more than 2
Harper's 2P% away from the rim is 32.4% (he's 34.1% from the arc).
Bailey's 2P% away from the rim is 47.0% (he's 36.3% from the arc).
Neither are hitting 14-15 footers at 50-60% (though I don't have an issue with Bailey at that distance... only every other guy on the team).
The midrange shot is not "dead" - but it should be a last resort for the vast, vast majority of college players. And "just inside the arc" should be drilled out of everyone.
Agree shots from 1 foot just inside the line should be drilled out but Dylan hasn’t taken a lot of midrange because he takes so many to the rim or in the paint . I will take ACE taking 2’s all day . When he misses from 2 I am suprised , Durant like. We didn’t get ACE for 2 for last 8-9 minutes until we did and he gave us the lead. All day.
True but other than a weave they run totally iso ball not many plays at all for those killing Pike.
St Johns takes more mid range shots than anyone else I've seen on a regular basis and they have the best coach of all time in Rick Pitino......Pitino has also had teams that favored taking a bunch of 3 point shots, at Providence, Kentucky and Louisville.
The point that the Pike critics cannot comprehend is that you have to coach to your personnel and talent level, which is why the OP fails so often.....instead of picking actual valid items, he picks random items that have no relevance at all.
I'm going to wait for the Pitino St Johme shot charts to be posted and see how different it looks that RUs....neither team has good 3 point shooting, so why would someone say RU should have a shot chart like Michigan.....its just dumb comments that aren't even close to reality.
The point that the Pike critics cannot comprehend is that you have to coach to your personnel and talent level, which is why the OP fails so often.....instead of picking actual valid items, he picks random items that have no relevance at all.
I'm going to wait for the Pitino St Johme shot charts to be posted and see how different it looks that RUs....neither team has good 3 point shooting, so why would someone say RU should have a shot chart like Michigan.....its just dumb comments that aren't even close to reality.
But St. John’s isn’t good at offense. This is an argument for the view (that I agree with) that you can win with mediocre offense and great defense. It’s not an argument that this kind of shot chart leads or can lead to good offense.
It does bring personnel into the conversation though which is extremely relevant imo.
You're right but to the wrong question.
What's the best offense for our roster? Correct - Pike is running an offense to meet the personnel.
Great.
But it's not a one year system adjustment.
The larger question is why do we have a roster that best fits this offense?
It starts with ideal system to run - then get players that fit it.
Every year it's "we need to shoot more 3s" and then the answer "we can't. We don't have the players to shoot more 3s".
Need to look beyond this roster and at the overall offensive direction the staff wants to pursue.
Nearly every agrees that the most efficient offensive shot chart is the Michigan one.
That is the best way for prolonged, year over year success.
Does it have to be that every game or year? No.
But that should still be the over arching goal of the program.
That leads to the real question:
Does HC Pike agree?
And is he willing to act on it and recruit players that would fit it?
We have not had dominate offensive scoring big men like Goldin at Michigan or Queen at Maryland or Kaufman Redd at Purdue. If you know you are going to get 34-50 points in the paint , then you can shoot 3’s all day to supplement. But if you do not have that guy , then hit as many 2’s as you can with 3’s on kick outs and penetration . Now you had our regular defense or even one 2 notches below , an adequate defense , then that would work for many wins. Defense has cost us at least 7-8 games this year
Ace is also a good 3 point shooter, one of our best percentage wise. Via coaching, it should have been ingrained into him to shoot more threes than midrange. I am doubting it was highly emphasized to him.
If Burnett doesn’t hit that last second deep 3 no one is bringing up the shot chart.
Including Wesleyan his career record is 342-311. Which is not good, but it’s not under .500
You can look this stuff up instead of just saying shit you know.
That would be a mistake.
Hopefully the staff is reviewing the shot chart after every game.
And this isn't entirely true.
Maybe the shot chart specifically isn't being brought up but there have been many threads about how many "deep 2s" we take with regularity. And the need to take more efficient shots.
Before someone says "but our players aren't good at those efficient shots!"
See my prior post - then stop getting those players in the first place.
Last edited:
Sorry, my mistake. I must have misread the numbers as another's coaches record. I didn't mean to make shit up. Again, sorry.
I’m sure the shot chart is one of the metrics coaches look at. I don’t recall seeing many threads dedicated to how many deep 2’s we take.
I would think analyzing shot charts over an entire season would be more indicative of the type of team you are as opposed to one game. Your opponent has some influence over the shots you’re taking.
The shots a team takes is also going to be driven by your players. Getting players who are better 3 pt or mid range shooters is a different story. That’s a recruiting issue.
Alternative explanation: one of the teams plays two offensively minded star centers, the other team is hurting in the post.
Maybe if we had those Michigan 7-footers our shot chart would look like that. Maybe if Michigan had our rosters their shot chart would look like ours.
The offense is scoring more points than any other under Pike.
We are losing because of defense not lack of offense. Basketball is a scoring game but you have to get stops once in a.whole. We don’t.
We are losing because of defense not lack of offense. Basketball is a scoring game but you have to get stops once in a.whole. We don’t.
yes we are losing mostly because of a lack of defense/rebounding. however, our scoring more points is not a result of Pike improving his offensive system in any way. we’re scoring more because we have two future NBA all stars and we’ve increased our tempo a little bit from previous years
This year.
The real discussion is next year (or prior years).
Year over year we take an inordinate amount (compared to other college teams and likely NBA teams) of mid range shots - i.e. the most inefficient shot in basketball.
Its not a "offense to fit the talent" thing.
At some point it's a deliberate decision to take them (or maybe deliberate decision to not tell players to take them).
As you point out, Ace and Dylan have covered over that problem this year.
But it's not sustainable unless we're getting more shot makers like them next year.
See how bad the scoring has been in other years prior.
The pace may be a bit higher, but we are taking roughly the same number of FGA per game (60.0 in 2024-25 vs. 60.2 in 2023-24).
The difference is, we're making more of them (1.5 more 2P, 1.8 more 3P) and we're getting more from the line (2.8 more FTM on 1.9 more FTA).
This isn't just because of Harper/Bailey. The rest of the team is shooting .426 FG% (last year the team shot .389) and .722 from the FT line (last year the team shot .658). We're more efficient offensively this year (in large part because Simpson/Griffiths/Fernandes/Davis had such low FG% last year).
On the flip side, we're giving up an additional 4.7 FGA per game and 5.0 FGM per game! It's easier for teams to get shots off against us, and their FG% is better when they do (.458 vs. .408). I'd be curious to see year-over-year forced shot clock violations... that used to be a regular occurrence, and it's become much less common.
The difference is, we're making more of them (1.5 more 2P, 1.8 more 3P) and we're getting more from the line (2.8 more FTM on 1.9 more FTA).
This isn't just because of Harper/Bailey. The rest of the team is shooting .426 FG% (last year the team shot .389) and .722 from the FT line (last year the team shot .658). We're more efficient offensively this year (in large part because Simpson/Griffiths/Fernandes/Davis had such low FG% last year).
On the flip side, we're giving up an additional 4.7 FGA per game and 5.0 FGM per game! It's easier for teams to get shots off against us, and their FG% is better when they do (.458 vs. .408). I'd be curious to see year-over-year forced shot clock violations... that used to be a regular occurrence, and it's become much less common.
Not buying it. The shot selection for each team is diametrically opposed, yet RU scored 57 points in a half and lost on the road on a Buzzer beater with more than a little help from the refs.
