Okay - but my example still holds. Ron and Geo attempted the most 3s on that 2020-21 team by far. They were 31% and 30.3% respectively from downtown. Those aren’t exactly world beater perimeter shooting numbers. JY was really only one who shot well that season from deep. Paul shot a high percentage on low volume (he made 22 3s).
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
Okay - but my example still holds. Ron and Geo attempted the most 3s on that 2020-21 team by far. They were 31% and 30.3% respectively from downtown. Those aren’t exactly world beater perimeter shooting numbers. JY was really only one who shot well that season from deep. Paul shot a high percentage on low volume (he made 22 3s).
That team also finished #42 overall which isn't going to make the tournament most years. It was 94th on offense
37-40th best resume on the S curve but that’s splitting hairs…
Your actually kind of reinforcing my point though. 94th best offense was good enough to be 42nd best. As long as the defense holds strong, we likely wouldn’t need a top 50 offense to place 30th unless Ace and Dylan turn out to be disappointments in other areas of projected strength. I feel pretty confident that those two will be JY / Tez on steroids in the transition game with high efficiency. The question is whether or not we can cause the turnovers we need to facilitate similar volume of opportunities.
The points made need more depth.
For instance- regarding shooting percentage. Let's say a player shoots 33% from beyond the arc but when broken down shoots over 40% from the corner/open and somewhere in the 20% range on pull ups or the high arc. That player may be much more valuable when you take the ball out of his hands and let him rotate outside for open looks on drive and kickouts. Another example would be a player shooting in the % rhythm of the offense vs. a higher usage player having to heave it up in a desperation shot. I'm not sure where to find such college advanced stats but would be useful to know since everyone here seems to be making assumptions based on "Level 1" type stats. My overall point is that based on projected talent level, Ace and Dylan even in ISO sets will put more pressure on the opposition defense than we've seen in a while at RU. This theoretically will take the offensive pressure off of teammates and create more open looks than many of their teammates may have ever seen prior. Difficult to project & measure that based on player performance from different environments and roles.
Regarding your Scarlet Letter comment. Which player(s) are you referring to and who was the alternative player options? That matters.
When did we have the 94th best offense? I don't recall this team being in the top 150.
It's likely that Ron his senior year will put up better, or at least much more efficient numbers than Ace will this year. I wouldn't be banking on high efficiency from freshman. If we get it, it will be nice, but I don't expect it.
One of the biggest changes will be Dylan and face getting us easy buckets in transition. Lack of these easy points has been a major problem for Rutgers for years now. Both also should be able to finish at the rim which has been another massive problem. Dylan is so crafty and absorbs contact to finish while Ace will just be using his length and athleticism. We should also see more trips to the foul line than we have in recent years
Don't have stats on that but you are definitely on to something. In transition & breaks we seem to struggle finishing even to the point of causing negative point swings.
Yeah, I mentioned Harper's senior year when he went 53% eFG and 57% true shooting.
What metric you have them at 94 that year? I see 235 in pts per, 201 in offensive rating
Correct. A good defense doesn’t leave a playmaker and distributor wide open PERIOD.
This garbage that defenses will sag into the lane when JWill is on the perimeter is simple Simon 3rd grade hoops crap.
I was looking at Kenpom - we were 82 there. I took Green’s word for it about 94. I’m not sure what system he used but it was in the same ball park.
Regarding Ron, the metrics your referencing are misleading in a sense because they disregard the impact of defense on offense which is hugely correlated for a D first team like Rutgers. Last year was a major aberration to this as our transition game was history below average. We missed many fast break opportunities that would have been near automatic on many other teams. When you make a high volume of those types of shots your net efficiency is much higher overall (even when SOS adjusted). That’s what I’ve been trying to explain. Acuff making a high volume of uncontested fast break layups (often in garbage time) boosts his overall efficiency, but does little from a predictive standpoint in terms of predicting how efficient he may or may not be within the dynamics of a BIG game where he’s, at best, the 3rd option on offense.
Last edited:
Not sure how Ron's #'s are misleading, but whatever.
In that scenario, with all the adjustments, team was 83 in offense, 16 in defense, and, what, 16-12 that year?
Of course making your layups boosts efficiency. And as I've been saying, J Willvis already borderline great at the rim and mid range and he's still well below average in efficiency. To me, it's more likely Acuff if more about the player from two years ago with talent around him, than it is that J Will suddenly decides to incorporate the 3 often enough to become more valuable.
Either way, this whole conversation is what's great about this year, so many possibilities.
I’m simply saying that Ron scored a lot of easy transition points off of opportunities created by the defense. On a team that doesn’t create as many of those types of opportunities, there’s less volume of those high percentage shots. It’s not a knock on Ron at all - what I meant by misleading is that if you replace JY, Tez and Caleb on that roster with guys like Acuff, Noah Fernandez and Hayes - Ron likely gets a lot less of those transition opportunities which would bring down his overall efficiency.
In other words, how efficient you are on offense is partly driven by what your defense does - and when transition play is a relative strength that correlation increases. Thats why I’m hypothesizing that D is going to be more important that folks think. Dylan and Ace may be stars but they are still frosh and all else equal, it’s much easier to shine on raw talent through the transition game than to consistently beat team D in half court sets.
How would you be defending Ace and/or Dylan when they have the ball?
If JWill is standing on the opposite side corner or wing, you wouldn’t have his man cheat into the lane?
If the ball swings around, you consider that a win since he's historically been a bad 3pt shooter. Tell the defense dont close out and let him shoot.
Now imagine it's a historically very good 3pt shooter like Hayes (some have said or Acuff but others say that's not true).
You can't have that man cheat in and not worry about a close out.
That generates space for Ace/Dylan by holding defenders accountable further out to the 3pt line.
Obviously you don't leave JWill open when he hasthe ball already.
But he (potentially) won't.
He'll likely be the 3rd or 4th option on offense.
If that 3rd or 4th option is on the perimeter and not a good shooter then the defense can hedge more towards options 1 and 2.
This isn't last year where it's "we don't need to throw extra defenders at Simpson or Davis or Hyatt. We can keep a man close to JWill because he's the top threat if he gets the ball."
But he (potentially) won't.
He'll likely be the 3rd or 4th option on offense.
If that 3rd or 4th option is on the perimeter and not a good shooter then the defense can hedge more towards options 1 and 2.
This isn't last year where it's "we don't need to throw extra defenders at Simpson or Davis or Hyatt. We can keep a man close to JWill because he's the top threat if he gets the ball."
I'm very late to the party and only read the OP. I don't think we can put a number on it based on individual effort. Sure we will score more but there's only 1 ball and 40 minutes so not everyone is going to average what they can average. It's how well they play together and of course how well they knock down open shots if they do play well together.
The bottom line is we will score more because we have more scorers. We will look to push the pace and build leads and maintain leads. I suspect there will be very few games where we look to scratch and claw for a low scoring win but teams like SHU may force that to happen.
The bottom line is we will score more because we have more scorers. We will look to push the pace and build leads and maintain leads. I suspect there will be very few games where we look to scratch and claw for a low scoring win but teams like SHU may force that to happen.
If I am Pike, as much as possible, I want a good 3 point shooter weak side corner.
I would have my best guard and wing defender covering Ace and Dylan.
If I am the opposing HC, if JWill is on the perimeter and either has the ball, or is one pass away, he would be covered. 99% of the time the defender will have a foot in the paint if they have a weak side perimeter player that is two passes away.
What type of defense? Man, 3-2, match-up zone etc? If a guy cheats too much in a zone, it can break down the entire defensive scheme and becomes susceptible to back-door cuts etc at the rim.
In a straight man or match-up zone, is the assumption that everyone on D is a strong defender and that JWill is just a spot up statue? If the 2 best defenders are on Ace and Dylan it may mean that a first pass to JWill even on the wing becomes a potential to break down his man by attacking the rim or even drawing interior defenders for a dish off to another slashing teammate.
Ron was in the top 90% percentile in % of shots at the rim, and above the break 3's. Not sure much of his rim was in transition, as that really wasn't his game. I recall more post up, but don't care to look it up. Everyone's efficiency will slightly be dictated by those around, I agree. Ron showed a consistent progression of improvement through his career. I just don't think you're going to see that efficiency from Ace this year. He will be more a volume scorer. I'd expect Dylan to be the more efficient of the two, if he shoots decently from 3.
I'm 100% taking that JWill drive into traffic over Ace/Dylan and over that ball landing in a 40% 3pt shooter for an open 3.
My dream scenario (as the defende) is JWill choosing between an open 3 or driving into traffic.
And I say traffic because I'm not closing over strong and begging JWill to shoot it.
Maybe I'm just overestimating how sophisticated college defenses are.
I think your defensive ideas are only accounting for the guard with the ball and the shooter. There are distributors and playmakers that are very involved in making a great offensive set. When I coached a defense, playmakers and distributors got my defenses’ attention.
I often told my teams that a made shot against us was made easy by a great pass/ penetration. Said another way, if a good passer/distributor like JWill has space and some time, with the finishers on this team….the D is screwed.
Last edited:
I think you may be over-simplifying things. For instance, do we know the breakdown of JWill's shooting percentages based on where he is on the floor in a spot up situation where his man is not closing and leaving him room? I'm guessing that most college players can hit the 3 at a very good clip in an open gym and with less pressure. Hypothetically, let's say that JWill shoots an open corner 3 at 5% less than his replacement. But, his replacement is essentially only a spot up shooter while JWill can create his own shot and/or facilitate more effectively as lead or first pass recipient. If their ability to defend was about equal, I would prefer to have JWill on the floor above replacement.
Yes, but I'll take Ron Harper taking 3's in the last 5 minutes of a close game over most guys who shoot a higher percentage. Same with Big Shot Maker Geo Baker who shot around 32-33%.
And a slumping Baker....
Last edited:
Behind Jeremiah Williams, Rutgers resurrects spiraling season: ‘He’s doing some unbelievable things’
Rutgers has looked like a different team since Jeremiah Williams entered the fold.
Here’s a refresher on the impact J Will had in his first few games for those who seem to be disregarding it.
Sadly there was more season after those first few games. This was a team that did finish 1-7 with JWill, yes?Behind Jeremiah Williams, Rutgers resurrects spiraling season: ‘He’s doing some unbelievable things’
Rutgers has looked like a different team since Jeremiah Williams entered the fold.www.nj.com
Here’s a refresher on the impact J Will had in his first few games for those who seem to be disregarding it.
JWill had a pretty nice effect on the teams defense.
Games against P5 and Big East we gave up 66.92 pts per in the 12 games he played and 71.85 in the 13 he didn't.
We actually scored less, 63 per with JWill vs 64.77 without.
We shot worse from 3 with JWill 30.89% wo vs 29.27% with him.
We rebounded less with JWill, 32.77 wo vs 31.17 with him.
Assists, steals, free throw % went up a bit with him, turnovers went down.
Let's not forget the teams on the back end of the schedule had a 8% lower winning percentage overall. We played Michigan twice, Maryland three times. JWill played 6 games against teams that didn't win 20 games this year. There were only 3 such games in the 13 before he played.
It's really hard to say he had a big impact overall on the season in either direction. Let's all just be thankful this season should be a different story overall and stop trying to go back to LY.
It was explained to you that those first 4 games were indicative of J Will’s potential and then opponents had tape on him which allowed them to focus on stopping him since we had nobody else who was an offensive threat other than Cliff who is limited in his own right in terms of playmaking ability - he is limited in terms of ways he can score - needs to receive the ball in position to dunk it or similar.
Initially you tried to make the case that it was Mag and not J Will would was a difference maker in those games. Now your blending numbers from other games to try to prove a point. This article embodies what everyone was unanimously saying after those first 4 games.
I believe that his performance suffered towards the end of the season because of conditioning. He got through the 1st few games with fumes. Only explanation I can give for him falling all the time after those initial games.
Obviously I am not certain how much if any fatigue was a role.
Obviously I am not certain how much if any fatigue was a role.
Opponents started double teaming him and he didn’t do a very good of handling it. He showed a lot of clumsiness for sure. But that doesn’t take away from the vision he showed in the early games and an ability to create for himself when nothing else was doing.
He was so good I was certain he would get poached next year for 7 figures. He took a dead team and gave us life (and hope)
Exactly. I guess that’s why I’m having a hard
time seeing how anyone is bearish on him. Taking his blended stats inclusive of games where teams clearly prioritized shutting him down just doesn’t matter much at all in my book. That will not be the approach next season. And he didn’t come across as a player who wanted to be high usage. Most of his iso moves were made late in shot clocks when there was nowhere else to go. In the early games he made quite a few shots with time expiring.
Those first four games were what you get with a weak schedule and JWill introduced to a team where Mag was engaged. Lose Mag, right back to the team it was wo JWill.
The article means nothing except people overreact to short good spells. I bet the end of season articles aren't as glowing.
If your point is JWill is excellent if teams aren't expecting him, not sure why you'd want to make the point.
Time to move on.
I don't recall teams prioritizing shutting him down. I'm sure they did to an extent in that there was suddenly a veteran that at least knew how to play basketball they had to account for. He a gave a second guy that could handle the ball.
Stats are stats. You want me to only worry about what he did against the worst team in the league, one of the three worst, a team in a five game losing streak, and NW only? Sorry, he gets judged on 12 games, not 4.
Again, he's a good player, and should be better this year not counted on to shoot.
A weak schedule? Every other player played non-conference cupcakes. J Will did not. He was still our leading scorer in points per game. Besides which - I’m not understanding where you are even getting “weak schedule” from. Two of those 4 games were against NCAA at large teams and the other two games were still against BIG teams on the road. Your grasping at straws there implying that he did well against bad teams as if he played his first 4 games against LIU or something.
To your second point - In the first few games - teams were not prepared for RU to suddenly have a player in J Will who was capable of beating a defender one on one in iso. He burned opponents over and over again by beating his defender off the dribble and nailing either a mid range or a lay up with the shot clock expiring. The scouting report on RU before that said not to worry much about that possibility because none of our other guards could finish in halfcourt penetration or transition with any consistency. So yes - in a sense, he exploited the unexpected at that time. Once there was film on him, teams prepped appropriately to ensure that there were help defenders ready to force a lower percentage shot. But let’s be clear here, when they ball couldn’t get to Cliff, J Will trying to make something happen himself gave us the best chance of scoring.
The bottom line is you are vastly exaggerating any concerns about J Will’s efficiency. He put the ball through the net on 44.4% of his shots (way more than any of our other guards). And that’s despite many of his shots being taken because there was nowhere else to go with the ball as the shot clock was winding down. Nobody was setting J Will up for high percentage shots - literally never.
I eliminated non con cupcakes by removing them from the discussion. It's why I mentioned only P5 and Big East games. You aren't taking the timing of the games into consideration.. Again Wisconsin was the fourth game in a five game losing streak for them. They were lost at the time. Came back and beat us later. Michigan, an awful team, came back and beat us later. 25% of JWill's games were against Maryland, we lost the next two against them. Northwestern was a good win. RU had already beaten at large teams pre J Will (Seton Hall, Nebraska) , so I can't consider that earth shattering.
Yes, he led us in scoring and he took the most shots. You are getting tied up in the fact that he was a bad teams best player. He wasn't the only player that could get his own shot, in fact Simpson was better at that. Simpson just couldn't shoot to save his life, but he was the only one that could create an open look. JWill was older, stronger, and a finisher. JWill is efficient/excellent at the two point game, which in itself is inefficient for a guard. 44% on two's is blah. Take a look at the stat s Evan Miya's site has. It's valuations show JWill as the 7th most valuable to the team when he is on the floor and 4th most valuable player for RU based on his individual stats. Their stats hit him pretty hard on the defensive end. I actually thought he was little better than they give him credit for.
No one on the team was ever set up for high % shots, at least it happened rarely. The two guys who were willing to shoot, maybe three, also happened to be the guys with the ball in their hands, JWill and Simpson. Hyatt is the only other guy that looked shot.
J Will only attempted 24 threes. He’s a career 25.5% FT shooter on very few attempts. That’s not good (it’s better than Davis though by the way), but you also can’t compare his 3s to someone like Hyatt’s or Martini’s who were taking them from the corner on kick outs. Unless he’s extremely well contested J Will is highly efficient from 2 even against top competition which should be a huge asset for us next season. You can’t take anything away from Acuff’s numbers about how he’ll do against better opponents as he basically played an entire schedule of cupcakes or piled on garbage time points in a few very lopsided games against real teams. Same for Jordan. We won’t know until we see how their skills transfer at the BIG level. But on offense, J Will is better at just about everything than Davis. And Davis is not enough better at D to compensate and take playing time from Williams. Not even close. I don’t care if he “schooled” him on a few one on one practice drills. I know what I saw last year and Davis would have miles to go to catch up to the value J Will brings. I’m fairly certain Pike agrees.
Yes, and the limited three point attempts is completely what depletes his value/efficiency.
Yup, Acuff being third leading scorer is just a prediction from me. No idea if it will happen or if he'll make the leap. He honestly hasn't been great in the very games he's played against P5.
I have zero idea of prediction for Derkack, his game seems JWill light. As for Davis, I think he's already better than JWill defensively and really the only guy we have to put on smaller/faster guards. Offensively? Maybe he'll develop, maybe he won't. We will find out. Likeable kid, rooting for him.
I never said J Will is better on defense. I said I don’t think Davis’ overall D makes a material difference over J Will who isn’t a bad defender. J Will also has more length and rebounds better.
Davis and J Will are on different galaxies offensively. Now Davis was a frosh so he absolutely may take major steps forward, but his offensive game is very far behind where J Will was last season in pretty much all facets. Davis is a small guard who struggled to finish in transition, isn’t a good shooter (really from any range or from the FT line - he’s worse than J Will from 3), and is not at this point a good ball distributor (which isn’t great when your a smaller sized guard). He also cannot create for himself with any real consistency in one on one coverage match ups. Making an occasional mid range like the one in the practice video is not what I’m talking about. He doesn’t finish penetration drives with even modest single coverage - at least not consistently.
J Will is very good at creating his own shot in the paint absent a double team or trap from a help defender. He proved early on that he’s a good passer and looks to pass eapecially in transition where Davis puts his head down and drives hoping to get fouled. J Will a much better FT shooter. Not worse from 3. And so on. Again, not close.
Last edited:
I don't disagree with anything you say here when comparing the 4th year JWill to true freshman JMike. All true.
The funny thing is, you are so firm in supporting JWill and his 44.7% shooting (50% from 2 really) while awful shooting JMike shot 48% from two in January and 46% in February, improving greatly from his at least ten % point less numbers from November and December. His FT% went from sub 40's into the 60's for the last 20 games too, so it shows he was growing as a freshman. He did fall back off a cliff the last 4 games, regression to the mean, or just a tired freshman? We will find out.
Similar threads
