J Will had 18 points and 7 assists in the Wisconsin game - the best of those opponents. I don’t see how you can dismiss him as the primary difference maker there. They won the NW game (second best of those opponents) without Mag at all.
We will be better on offense next year, an obvious GIVEN...how? and by how much? looking at data
- Thread starter Greene Rice FIG
- Start date
J Will had 18 points and 7 assists in the Wisconsin game - the best of those opponents. I don’t see how you can dismiss him as the primary difference maker there. They won the NW game (second best of those opponents) without Mag at all.
Yes, thats why i said the first three before Mag sat out.
Wasn't Wisconsin in the midst of a 5 game losing streak? And that was the best win. Yes, he scored 18, shooting 40% from the floor. Noah scored 17 taking nine less shots. Three others in double figures on higher shooting %'s. I thought he played well against NW, but he still took the most shots and shot under 50%. Davis, Cliff, and Palm all scored 9 or 11 on 50% or better shooting.
He looked good when you compare him to Simpson putting the ball in the basket. I think that has inflated peoples thoughts.
Just, wow. Did you even watch the games or are you simply googling shooting percentage rates to make a point that is just flat out wrong. The discussion strings on this board following those games unanimously confirm this. Everyone was ready to declare J will the savior and there was no dissent to that view. Nobody was talking about Mag being a stud or standing out as a star. Thats just a false narrative. In fact, the only thing that might have been said was that Mag quietly had a few good games with some theories that he was benefiting from the addition of J Williams. From what I saw in watching a few Bosco games, the kid going to Howard on that team (the one who ran the PG alongside Dylan) plays a similar style game to J Will. I’m not sure why you think that type of player wouldn’t work considering Bosco had a great year and that’s what Dylan is used to.
Oh, I watched the games. I don't care what people were talking about, its irrelevant. Nobody said Mag played like a star, I said he was our best player for those first few games. Of course people were happy to see what Williams did compared to what we were seeing out of Simpson and Hyatt.
High usage, inefficient scoring doesn't really do much for a team though. JWill is a slightly above average player, there is nothing wrong with that. He's excellent in the mid range. His fit with Dylan is bad because he doesn't spread the floor. Dylan likes to get in the lane. Until JWill is willing to, and can prove he is able to shoot from outside, his defender can sit back and crowd the paint a bit. Teams recognized this this year, and he didn't quite get as many shots down the stretch. I also thought that it effected his overall game, with his rebounding and distribution dropping a bit.
If JWill could shoot from deep, he'd be great. Every other aspect of his game is solid.
The guy you are predicting to start in his place isn’t a good shooter either. There’s almost no chance J Will isn’t a starter. Close to zero.
I'm not predicting it, I think JWill will start, because of his defense, and ability to be a lead guard while Dylan gets his feet wet. Acuff being out til the season starts doesn't help either. Just because he will start doesn't mean he's the ideal fit.
My first impression is Pike needs to let Ace and Dylan go out there and ball. Sure the defense may suffer a little but if they can live up to their offensive potential they have to be allowed to go out and dominate. If Pike tries to break them down into the current defensive first system we’ll have issues.
I’m not sure what that has to do with J Will? The other candidates to play alongside those 2 on the perimeter have no experience at the D1 level. Those saying he only played 10 games are crazy - he played before that in the AAC which is a MUCH better league than the MAC or the NEC. He averaged 12.2 ppg (led us in scoring), 2.8 assists per game (second to Simpson but he didn’t play any cupcakes), second in steals at 1.2 per game, and led all guards in rebounding. I’m not sure why folks are thinking the other guys we brought in are better complements - high volume scorers on mid majors? I just dont get it.
The main question I raised months ago with the thread......how much will our offensive efficiency go up...what will they shoot from the perimeter. We have to move the needle a TON. Can we be a Top 50 offensive team (probably need to be Top 20) if Ace and Dylan don't shoot at least an effective FG% of 50%.
If Dylan and Ace average a combine 40 PPG with an effective FG% of 47% I don't think we will be a Top 30 team.
What if the D drops less than you think it will? Suppose this is the starting line up:
J Will, Dylan, Ace, Martini and Ogbole
Dercack and Davis early subs in the rotation
If I was a betting person - that would be my prediction. I think that core 7 could hang in the top 30 or so on D. Folks want to see 80+ ppg and won’t like this core rotation for that goal. I agree. But that primary group could average more than 75 and be vastly improved from previous teams while also being pretty strong on D.
Hayes brought in strategically for short stretches to hit some shots when the defensive match up doesn’t figure to hurt too much. I see him as a 12-15 minute type guy who could average 6.
Acuff working his way back from a foot injury isn’t likely to be a major contributor early.
The other newcomers PT in my opinion will be mostly dictated by where their D is at. Again - I know this won’t be popular view but it’s my prediction of what will happen.
I am not certain the D will drop all that much.....still need efficiency offensively and not raw scoring.
We finished 5th (.921) in effective defense last year. Let's move us to 20th (.955). If we want to be even #30 overall (expectations are higher) we would need offensive effective eff to be 1.134. That would be around 50th.
In the top 50 there was only 1 team below 50% effective FG% and only 1 bad perimeter shooting team. Texas A&M.
I am going to stick with my prediction that Ace and Dylan will not be good 3 point shooters.
We finished 5th (.921) in effective defense last year. Let's move us to 20th (.955). If we want to be even #30 overall (expectations are higher) we would need offensive effective eff to be 1.134. That would be around 50th.
In the top 50 there was only 1 team below 50% effective FG% and only 1 bad perimeter shooting team. Texas A&M.
I am going to stick with my prediction that Ace and Dylan will not be good 3 point shooters.
Texas A&M was successful offensively by leading the nation in ORB and not turning the ball over.
Barring additional injury, I am with you on the likely starting line-up.
Do not disagree about Hayes' role, but Acuff's foot should be fully healed before Fall practice begins, by October 1. I still fully expect him to be the 6th man, the role Hyatt, for example, was best suited for. And I believe Davis gets 10-12 min/g, based solely on his defense - and the fact that he is the pure PG reserve.
To me, the unknown roles, the least certain roles, are Derkack, Grant and Dortch:
Derkack: We just cannot know how his offense in the NEC will translate to the Big Ten, unless his 3-point shooting % rises this season as much as it did from the 22% in his frosh year to 27% last season ... meaning to 32% or more ... otherwise his offensive game is at the rim a LOT - not as easy in the Big Ten as it is in the NEC. His defense is supposedly top shelf - but by his own admission, he played almost 100% zone in 2 years at college (a recent article on him), and is eager to soak up the man to man principles RU uses.
Dortch/Grant: Still not sure what roles they play. Both are very athletic, maybe with a lot of upside ... who knows how tall either of them are (some have said 6'10", listed at 6'7" coming out of high school, both seem to have grown so maybe 6'8" or 6'9"). But we just do not know what, if any, offense they can deliver ... how many minutes ... after all there are only so many minutes to go around.
I believe you are correct with most of this.
That will be the starting lineup, and how the defense shakes out overall depends on a few things. How good can Dylan and Ace be defensively as freshman? I haven't really seen either of them have to play real D yet. They both have potential to be decent. I expect Martini and Ogbole to be our best defensive bigs.
The 80 point a game crowd are probably going to be disappointed in any scenario. Too many step up's in comp have to go correct or guys who haven't been able to shoot in the past would need vast improvement (JWIll, Derkack, and Davis all fall here). The Acuff injury hurts, I have him penciled in as the teams 3rd leading scorer.
I think your generally exaggerating the meaning of the advanced metrics. The 2021 team was top 40 (10 seed) with an offensive efficiency of 82 (not great at 3s). I’m not guaranteeing this team will be as good on D as that one, but I think they could potentially be reasonably comparable. If we were hypothetically 65 on offense and 20 on D - I think that would likely put us on the 6 or 7 line for NCAA seeding purposes. Thats 21-28 on the S curve.
Illinois won the big 10 championship and went far in the tournament with Ty Rodgers as a ball handing point forward type (they literally sold him as the pg at the beginning of the season) and on the floor about 23 minutes a game ..he’s a guy who hasn’t even attempted a 3 point shot in 2 years lol
I think we’ll be fine with JWill on the floor..it’s not like you can just leave him..he’s a baller
I think we’ll be fine with JWill on the floor..it’s not like you can just leave him..he’s a baller
Here comes the outlier support post. Ty gave them defense, barely touched the ball (his usage was half of JWill's), but also led the team in turnover %, shot 52% from the line. Somehow his Efg% was still 5% higher than JWill's. They would have been fine if he wasn't even on the team.
Even before the injury, I think the jury was kind of still out on Acuff. He put up a lot of points the past 2 seasons playing on 2 bad low major teams. His team from 2022-23 won only 8 games and should have been a whole lot better with the talent it had. The team went 13-18 in 2023 in the MAC (12-17 with Acuff). I’m not saying he won’t contribute. But you keep anointing him better than J Will and you don’t have a fair basis for it. As a sophomore, J will had a much better year on a 17-12 Temple team than Acuff did - that’s actually the closest to apples and apples comparison.
Again - why are you assuming J Will has to be or even wants to be a high usage style player? I think that’s a completely false narrative. His usage numbers were high last year because we had no better options. He otherwise plays a pass first style. He doesn’t jack up 3s, and only looked to penetrate because there were no better choices. Cliff was constantly double covered.
He's been on poor teams, no doubt. Id expect a Temple to be better, its historically good program. I also don't think he's a better player than JWill, I think he's a better fit next to Dylan only because he can spread the floor. Dylans strength is putting it on the floor and getting to the rim. Additional bodies in the lane hinder that. I wish JWill could, and would shoot from outside more. He's a better all around player. I do think we'll see the three of them w Ace out there at times as well.
I only go on what I've seen. He was ball dominant and shot alot last year. His usage was one of the highest on Temples team his freshman year. He looked to penetrate because that's what he does. He's great in the mid range.
Your going by his frosh season on a 5-11 team during the COVID year no less? Why not look at his sophomore year instead? Temple was 17-12 that year. He didn’t stand out as high usage.
1. I thought Acuff was a shooting threat? When I kept petitioning for a transfer shooter (to potentially start over/with JWill) people kept saying we already had that with Acuff. Is that not the case? If not, then Hayes needs to seriously be further up the rotation and in consideration for starting/ending games to keep the defense off Dylan/Ace.
2. Just because Dylan played "off ball" or "wasn't the PG" in HS doesn't mean that's the plan going forward. I can easily see a scenario where he is looking to prove his PG feasibility to the NBA and is looking to have the ball in his hands more. That would (in my opinion) make having another shooting threat on the court more sensible instead of another guard who's primary offensive role requires the ball in his hands.
2. Just because Dylan played "off ball" or "wasn't the PG" in HS doesn't mean that's the plan going forward. I can easily see a scenario where he is looking to prove his PG feasibility to the NBA and is looking to have the ball in his hands more. That would (in my opinion) make having another shooting threat on the court more sensible instead of another guard who's primary offensive role requires the ball in his hands.
Re number 2 - if he averages +15 ppg and plays solid D as a frosh he’s a top 3 draft pick. He he averages 13 on solid efficiency, the same is probably still true. He doesn’t need to bring the ball up to prove anything to NBA scouts. Non-factor.
Acuff is a career 32.8% perimeter shooter. He’s not supposed to be a great defender though and Hayes is even worse.
Usage has nothing to do with how often you touch the ball. Usage is the % of possessions that ended in either a shot or a turnover by a player - it is not the % of the time you spent with the ball in your control. It is not a metric that includes ball handling, beating the press, assists, etc.
Griffiths had a higher usage than Fernandes and Davis this season, even though they touched the ball much more often than he did.
I'm mostly going by ten games I watched. So, one year out of three he wasn't high usage?
I think you need a combo of scorers and defenders out w the freshman. Zach and EO will be defenders first. You want a scorer to take some of the pressure off the kids.
Either way, not looking to bash JWill, who I've repeatedly said is a good player, so I'm done w this topic for now.
I know what usage is, I tried, perhaps poorly, to separate a comment on his usage and his actual role.
Correct. But it's not about proving to "NBA scouts". It's about proving to 1 or 2 teams he is different and should be drafted over Flagg or Ace because he could be their star PG for years.
Suppose San Antonio ends up #1 overall.
Dylan wants to say "I'm the guy who will get Wemby the ball when and where he needs it. That's more important than Ace or Flagg on the wing. Look at how I ran the offense at Rutgers."
I wouldn't be shocked if Ace also wanted to initiate and be a facilitator more as well. Again, to try and differentiate himself from Flagg and Harper to prove he should be #1 overall.
"You don't need a potential star PG (like Dylan). I can dribble and help run the offense from the wing like Durant or Tatum. Look at all the possessions I brought ball up, ran the offense when Dylan was out and helped run it when we were both on the court".
With the players seemingly so close, it'll come down to best fit for the particular teams picking #1 and #2 overall. They will want to be able to give the teams as many reasons as possible to pick them over the others.
Regarding Acuff outside shooting, that's disappointing.
And yes their defense is likely bad/worse than others on the team. But JMikes offense is terrible.
I posed the question last year: how come bad on defense is a seemingly scarlet letter and unredeemable but terrible non-factor on offense is an after-thought?
And yes their defense is likely bad/worse than others on the team. But JMikes offense is terrible.
I posed the question last year: how come bad on defense is a seemingly scarlet letter and unredeemable but terrible non-factor on offense is an after-thought?
I mean - you do realize he actually played in more games as a sophomore than he did the other two seasons combined right?
That one year was actually his only full year… Temple probably would’ve made the tournament if Battle stayed healthy.
Also - half of his frosh games were played with a limited roster due to Covid breaks. Somehow he avoided it and played more minutes than anyone, but you really cannot use that metric for those 16 games as he played some of them with deep bench rosters.
So we can only use the year you say? That's also not true, he only played in 22 games his soph year, 28 the other two.
Let's just hope he continues to improve further. Last year was his first above average PER. Get back to his freshman efficiency from deep, and maybe take a third per game
No - what I’m saying it’s the only year of the 3 that was a real season he participated in the entire year. And that happened to be the one you chose to dismiss.
Of the 3 seasons, his sophomore season most resembles the type of role he’ll be set up for at Rutgers. You can’t ascertain anything from usage statistics from a frosh during the COVID year from a team that had key players constantly out on break. Meaningless. As for his usage on RU last year - it makes complete sense for his metric to be high because he gave us the best chance to put the ball through the net by far when Cliff was double covered (which was basically all the time). We had nobody who could create for themselves better than him in the half court sets, nobody who could hit perimeter shots consistently, nobody besides Cliff who could do anything with the ball in the paint. He was better in iso than Derek, Davis and co. A lot better. And better than them at finishing in transition. That’s why his usage was high. Pike wanted it to be that way. Not because J Will wanted to take all the shots.
Also - efficiency numbers aren’t always the Bible. On paper, Acuff’s metrics look efficient from his junior year but that team had a lot of talent around Acuff and went 8-23 in the MAC. To me that stands out as a major red flag in terms of how good a “complement” Acuff can be for a cast of stars. Sure - maybe it was entirely on the coaching but I don’t see how that can just be assumed. Thats why my expectations for Acuff are more focused on him playing a spark plug role - kind of like JY offered his first year at RU.
No......
Main premise. Are we going to be a good shooting team. If the 3 guys who will touch the ball the most are not I have a tough time visioning us being better than slightly above average on offense.
It isn't about how much points Dylan and Ace score...it is about how many points we score per possession.
Maybe i am just scarred by seeing Ace's shot selection in these "exhibition" games AND looking at Dylan really not be a 3 point shooter in HS. In addition, seeing the real low 3 point shooting %s of RU freshman.
I think PSAL has a TON of good points here explaining JWill's game, and why his usage rate was what it was last season - I think I agree with all of them.
Acuff was a top scorer on VOLUME shooting last season. He is not going to get that type of volume at RU, barring massive injuries and disappointments from other players. And though he is a SCORER, he more a scorer than a shooter. His 3-point shooting is about 33%, which is only okay - though would have been 2nd best on RU's team last season to Fernandes. Last season, Fernandes was forced into a starting role, for which he was not suited (coming off a 17 ppg average for a better team in a better league - UMass in the A-10). Fernandes was athletic and quick, and if he had been 6'3" or taller would have been a real asset on defense - but at 5'11", though he did play very good on-ball defense, any opposing player 6'2" or 6'3" or taller simply shot right over him, and there was nothing Fernandes could do about it - and that was a real problem. Acuff's defense is not a known to me, but is rumored to NOT be his strength ... but he is 6'4", and in some ways while not being an asset on defense will not hurt as much as having a good but way too short defender on the floor like Fernandes - IMO.
IMO Acuff's best role is the role Hyatt SHOULD have had (and did have 2 years ago, sort of, until Mag's injury): A 6th man off the bench to provide offensive spark in the backcourt (vs Hyatt providing offensive spark in the frontcourt). Hyatt was a streaky shooter - when hot could fill it up, when cold needed to be benched, a good rebounder, an okay post defender for his size, incapable of defending on the perimeter, and below average in help defense. Hyatt just simply played too many minutes the last 2 seasons, a mark of the overall talent on the team more than his abilities. Acuff might average 15-20 minutes off the bench, subbing for either JWill or Harper - and at times for Bailey or Martini (pushing Bailey to the "4" slot).
Other critical role, but different from Acuff's role: Hayes as the designated 3-point shooter off the bench, to provide spacing, and punishment to opposing teams for help defense on Bailey, Harper and/or JWill. I expect Martini OR Hayes to be in the lineup for at least 30-35 minutes per game, to make sure there is always a potential 40% s3-point shooter on the court at almost all times ... Hayes limiting skill is the supposed lack of defense ... that could limit him to 8-12 mpg. If he had Derkack's athleticism and defensive instincts, he could challenge Acuff for minutes as the scoring offensive spark (though Hayes is really ONLY a spot-up shooter - 75%+ of his shots last season came from catch and shoot spot up 3's ... Acuff has a more multi-dimensional offensive game).
On Harper ... people are getting way too caught up in the debate on whether he is going to play or be a PG, or not. Think of Harper as a LEAD guard (like JWill is also a LEAD guard). J. Davis is a PG, not a lead guard. A lead guard can lead the offense, can trigger the offense, plays with the ball in his hands - but also has skills to play off the ball. Having multiple players who can BOTH play with the ball in their hands to create their own offense - and pass to open teammates to help them be better - but ALSO be dangerous offensively off the ball is a great advantage, and frankly more how the current game of hoops is played nowadays. RU has 3 such players now IMO: Bailey, Harper and JWill, with JWill having the least talent of those 3, but can still be effective in both roles.
People keep bringing up Illinois ... a PERFECT example of having LEAD guards, or equivalents. Illinois had multiple players who could create their own shots with the ball in their hands, command help defense, pass to teammates, but also play off the ball (Domask, Shannon and Hawkins). They also had multiple players who could hit the open 3 - including off the bench. RU finally has several of those types of players, even though they are young (Bailey and Harper, as comparable talents as Shannon and Hawkins - but less experienced).
Acuff was a top scorer on VOLUME shooting last season. He is not going to get that type of volume at RU, barring massive injuries and disappointments from other players. And though he is a SCORER, he more a scorer than a shooter. His 3-point shooting is about 33%, which is only okay - though would have been 2nd best on RU's team last season to Fernandes. Last season, Fernandes was forced into a starting role, for which he was not suited (coming off a 17 ppg average for a better team in a better league - UMass in the A-10). Fernandes was athletic and quick, and if he had been 6'3" or taller would have been a real asset on defense - but at 5'11", though he did play very good on-ball defense, any opposing player 6'2" or 6'3" or taller simply shot right over him, and there was nothing Fernandes could do about it - and that was a real problem. Acuff's defense is not a known to me, but is rumored to NOT be his strength ... but he is 6'4", and in some ways while not being an asset on defense will not hurt as much as having a good but way too short defender on the floor like Fernandes - IMO.
IMO Acuff's best role is the role Hyatt SHOULD have had (and did have 2 years ago, sort of, until Mag's injury): A 6th man off the bench to provide offensive spark in the backcourt (vs Hyatt providing offensive spark in the frontcourt). Hyatt was a streaky shooter - when hot could fill it up, when cold needed to be benched, a good rebounder, an okay post defender for his size, incapable of defending on the perimeter, and below average in help defense. Hyatt just simply played too many minutes the last 2 seasons, a mark of the overall talent on the team more than his abilities. Acuff might average 15-20 minutes off the bench, subbing for either JWill or Harper - and at times for Bailey or Martini (pushing Bailey to the "4" slot).
Other critical role, but different from Acuff's role: Hayes as the designated 3-point shooter off the bench, to provide spacing, and punishment to opposing teams for help defense on Bailey, Harper and/or JWill. I expect Martini OR Hayes to be in the lineup for at least 30-35 minutes per game, to make sure there is always a potential 40% s3-point shooter on the court at almost all times ... Hayes limiting skill is the supposed lack of defense ... that could limit him to 8-12 mpg. If he had Derkack's athleticism and defensive instincts, he could challenge Acuff for minutes as the scoring offensive spark (though Hayes is really ONLY a spot-up shooter - 75%+ of his shots last season came from catch and shoot spot up 3's ... Acuff has a more multi-dimensional offensive game).
On Harper ... people are getting way too caught up in the debate on whether he is going to play or be a PG, or not. Think of Harper as a LEAD guard (like JWill is also a LEAD guard). J. Davis is a PG, not a lead guard. A lead guard can lead the offense, can trigger the offense, plays with the ball in his hands - but also has skills to play off the ball. Having multiple players who can BOTH play with the ball in their hands to create their own offense - and pass to open teammates to help them be better - but ALSO be dangerous offensively off the ball is a great advantage, and frankly more how the current game of hoops is played nowadays. RU has 3 such players now IMO: Bailey, Harper and JWill, with JWill having the least talent of those 3, but can still be effective in both roles.
People keep bringing up Illinois ... a PERFECT example of having LEAD guards, or equivalents. Illinois had multiple players who could create their own shots with the ball in their hands, command help defense, pass to teammates, but also play off the ball (Domask, Shannon and Hawkins). They also had multiple players who could hit the open 3 - including off the bench. RU finally has several of those types of players, even though they are young (Bailey and Harper, as comparable talents as Shannon and Hawkins - but less experienced).
Fair point, Greene.
There is no doubt Bailey needs to improve his decision-making on shot selection as he enters a higher level of play, college ball. I could see him having games where he really forces it, going 2-13 or so from the field. But I could also see games where he forces it and because of his ridiculous talent HITS those high degree of difficulty shots, and goes 8-12 or 10-14 from the field, including several 3's. I could see him having both single digit scoring games as well as 25+ point games.
That said, Harper's 3-point shooting appeared to improve and get more consistent in the latter parts of the year, including in all those exhibition/all star games.
This is why Martini and Hayes are so important, even though they are not "stars". Their potential 38% to 40% 3-point shooting can help the other players have better looks and punish opposing teams for help defense on the stars.
The offensive efficiency question marks are also why I think Ogbole playing 15 mpg can be so important: He is a ridiculously good offensive rebounder, which can help make up for misses.
I'll have to take your word on what JWill wanted, I couldn't begin to tell you what's in his head.
I don't disagree with any of him being the best option last year, it was a terrible offensive team
I'm not dismissing any of his years, he's been fine/decent/average in all of them. His usage has nothing to do with why I think he's not an ideal fit next to Dylan. If Acuff was better defensively, his offensive skill set would be better next to Dylan, who I think will have the ball in his hands a lot. Look at his #'s from two years ago, TS% of 57+, eFG% of 54%, shot 34% from 3 on top of 55% from two. Those are the numbers he's capable of in a supporting role. He's done it before. JWill has never put up efficient offensive #'s like that.
JWill can help lead us to a more efficient offense....low turnovers....shoot it at or above 50% eff FG%....get teammates the ball in advantageous spots.
A separate question is what distribution of usage can we expect
JWill 20%
Dylan 26%
Ace 24%
Mystery spot 17%
Center 13%
A separate question is what distribution of usage can we expect
JWill 20%
Dylan 26%
Ace 24%
Mystery spot 17%
Center 13%
