Young or Mulcahy?

[BillyC80]

It’s only one game, but as a PG Young reminds me of a running back who never follows his blockers. He expects his speed to carry the day and is blind to the players around him.

On the other hand, for a guy playing his first collegiate game, Mulcahy impressed me as a true playmaker — a leader with patience and good court vision who gets everyone involved — the polar opposite of Young.

I see Young as a good change-of-pace guy who can inject some energy off the bench. But I would give Paul more minutes at the point, who along with Geo will do a better job leading our offense.

 

[wheezer]

I am sure Young is fully aware of the criticism, and he looked like he deserved it at times.... we can hope he learns

 

[RUChoppin]

Mulcahy impressed me for his first game out of the gate. Young didn't impress me as much.

Long season, though - not forming firm opinions yet.

 

[BillyC80]

I am sure Young is fully aware if the criticism, and he looked like he deserved it at times.... we can hope he learns

Wheezer, in a couple of interviews Pike said Young had to work on his playmaking and distributing the ball. This struck me as odd for a guy he was grooming to be our point guard. Now I see what he meant. We want Young’s speed, but to be an effective PG he needs better court vision. Paul has that already.

 

[MadRU]

Difference was on defense.

 

[zappaa]

Difference was on defense.

?

 

[MadRU]

?

Young was active on defense. Paul got caught on screens allowing open 3s. He will learn.

 

[BillyC80]

Difference was on defense.

Mad, I get that Young’s quicker feet likely make him a better defender. Paul can and will improve defensively.

But whatever Young gave us defensively he took back with 6 turnovers (and a missed breakaway layup that was like a 7th turnover).

It’s just one game so we’ll see. I want Young to be successful. If he adjusts and becomes more of a playmaker next game, then I’ll feel a lot better about our prospects with him running the point.

 

[zappaa]

Harper has to be one of the best wings in the league for us to be any good...anybody agree?

 

[MadRU]

Mad, I get that Young’s quicker feet likely make him a better defender. Paul can and will improve defensively.

But whatever Young gave us defensively he took back with 6 turnovers (and a missed breakaway layup that was like a 7th turnover).

It’s just one game so we’ll see. I want Young to be successful. If he adjusts and becomes more of a playmaker next game, then I’ll feel a lot better about our prospects with him running the point.

agree

 

[Yeah Baby]

I watched the game and Wenzel did a great job all game talking about these guys:

Mulcahey - was very high on him, especially his passing but thinks he is a 2/3 which is wheee we saw him last night. He can’t cover 1’s

Young - what we saw was a guy who hasn’t played in 1.5 years and he will get his legs back under him. Scored 29 points in a Big12 playoff game his last season at Texas. He will be a huge factor for us this year.

Harper - said there is a huge buzz about him in the league and thinks he will be a great one. He has shown many signs of this the last two seasons. Needs to hit FT’s.

 

[soundcrib]

They both impressed me.

 

[Knightmoves]

I’m not a shooting coach but how about Harper putting a little arc on his free throws? The line drives were not working last night.

Not worried about Jacob Young. Tried to do too much and was out of control with the ball last night. We need his ability to get to the basket off the dribble. He will settle down imo.

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

I do agree that Mulcahy looks like a team player / floor general type. Hopefully, that will be contagious.

Young could be just a scorer to come in off the bench.. an offensive 6th man. We'll know more by the time conference play rolls around.

 

[Yeah Baby]

Heard he was back out there working on it. He was pressing in his shooting but he can make some plays going to the hole for a bigger guy.

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

I’m not a shooting coach but how about Harper putting a little arc on his free throws? The line drives were not working last night.

Needs a deeper knee bend before release, soften that release point. I am convinced that's why taller players have FT issues. Shorter players can have a nice arc where the zenith is not far above the rim.. taller players using the same arc would have the ball coming down quite a bit after the zenith. That's why the underhand stuff works so well. Frankly, I think every tall player with FT issues should do that underhand stuff. Looking goofy is nothing if you can go from 50% to 80%.

Some of these guys have such big hands they could use the basketball like a softball toss..

 

[BillyC80]

Harper has to be one of the best wings in the league for us to be any good...anybody agree?

Zap, my point in this thread is, which guy — Young or Mulcahy — would put Ron in a better position to be one of the best wings?

 

[Yeah Baby]

Zap, my point in this thread is, which guy — Young or Mulcahy — would put Ron in a better position to be one of the best wings?

That’s a different question which I did not catch in your OP. Young is a 1/2 and Mulcahey is a 2/3. Harper is a 3/4. Based on that it’s Young. I didn’t see MC setting up Harper too much. I think that cake mostly from Baker. Young will set him up by drawing attention. MC will set him up with passing going forward. We could see all 4 of those guys play together 1-4 but Mathis to me played very well last night after a rough start. They all played together in small spurts so gelling will take time.

 

[Yeah Baby]

Odd man out in 2nd half was McConnell who had 3 rebounds to start the game and is one of our better rebounders. He must of done something wrong and I saw Pike talking to him and then he was buried on the bench. Could just be “hey let’s see what these new guys can do” or maybe something else. Could also be a game to game hot hand plays and cold hand sits (not just scoring but all around play).

 

[BillyC80]

Yeah Baby, it’s just a one game sample, but Young was a pretty selfish player — not a good quality for a PG.

You could see Paul looking to get others involved more. Maybe he’ll evolve into a “point forward” but whatever you call it, so far he seems like more of a playmaker than Young.

We need them both. It’s up to Pike to figure out the best way to utilize their skills and talents.

 

[Mr Magoo]

I still don't see Young as a PG even though when he left Texas, it seemed he was going to be groomed for that. We haven't seen Mulcahy play the point in college yet, although I'm sure he can do it. I think Mulcahy is the PG of the future and I stick to my prediction that he will be starting there by Christmas.

 

[RUChoppin]

Odd man out in 2nd half was McConnell who had 3 rebounds to start the game and is one of our better rebounders. He must of done something wrong and I saw Pike talking to him and then he was buried on the bench. Could just be “hey let’s see what these new guys can do” or maybe something else. Could also be a game to game hot hand plays and cold hand sits (not just scoring but all around play).

The way he was talking to him, really made it seem like Pike was trying to drive some point home. The reduction in minutes following makes me wonder what he did/said to draw coach's attention.

 

[RUChoppin]

I still don't see Young as a PG even though when he left Texas, it seemed he was going to be groomed for that. We haven't seen Mulcahy play the point in college yet, although I'm sure he can do it. I think Mulcahy is the PG of the future and I stick to my prediction that he will be starting there by Christmas.

Mulcahy did get a set or two early on where he was running the point - at least the one where he directed traffic then found Johnson for the alley oop.

 

[Yeah Baby]

Again Young is more of a 2 and MC is more of a 3. After MC is the passer and Young is the scorer which we will need. MC did a great job doing what usually a 4 or 5 would do against the zone catching and passing out of the high post. That was his job he does it well. They left Young open a lot for 3’s and he was off a bit though not as much as others from 3. He and Baker were just off a little. Young can fill the bucket. Not sure why you are comparing these 2 guys because they are completely different players. I would not consider to compare them at all as a coach, scout or fan.

 

[MORRISCOUNTY]

It is only one game but I would like see Mulcahy have more of a shoot first mentality.

There were several situations where he should have taken it hard to the rim but instead passed. He is a pass first guy but at some point when the rest of the team is throwing up brick after brick you need to take it to the hoop.

I also think he will be a better FT shooter than most.

Young seemed to be running around with his head cut off, but it will take him time to polish up his game.

Let's see what happens by the end of december when these players have time to get used to each other.

 

[toby83]

Young is more of defensive stopper off the bench. When he is on court same time as Mathis causes some havoc. Paul looks like might have trouble staying with Big Ten skill level scorers.

 

[RUChoppin]

At least as far as today went, Young struck me as a slashing two guard sort of player. McConnell was more of a typical wing/small forward. Mulcahy was something of a "point forward" distributor - wasn't really bring up the ball, but served as a hub a lot between the point guard and the wings/bigs, especially against the zone.

Young needs to flip his assist/turnover numbers before he can legitimately be considered a B1G point guard. Hoping it was just being a little over-amped to be back on the floor.

I can see why people talk a lot about Mulcahy as a passer - he sees the floor well and makes good decisions. Also pulled the trigger when he needed to. Looking forward to seeing him more as he and the staff get more comfortable.

 

[FAT MOON]

Young was active on defense. Paul got caught on screens allowing open 3s. He will learn.

I'm with you on this. Young defends HARD. Paul was trying (he was the only one talking on defense he was yelling out his position on every possession) but he was definitely having trouble closing out on shooters.

 

[NewJerseyHawk]

Young is not a PG, but can guard a PG

Mulcahy is more of a distributor but is not capable of guarding better PGs

There's McConnell who improved defensively but got lost on a switch where the Bryant guy banked a 3, where Harper switched off to cover for Caleb, who thought Harper would switch on the ball screen.

Mulcahy played most of the minutes that I would expect Caleb to capture and he also, got lost on some switches which left Bryant open for 3s.

These are really good problems to have and we haven't even mentioned Kiss, who probably can play solid defense and be a stationary shooter vs the zone.

Pike needs to find minutes for Kiss and Mulcahy together, if teams go zone in the OOC schedule of softer teams. It would expand the scouting reports and force teams to scramble.

My zone players are Caleb, Baker, Mulcahy, Kiss, Yeboah, Harper and Mathis, who can slash to the basket.....any of those 7 players with either Myles or Carter will create more space and spread the defense out....

 

[BillyC80]

Hawk, I think there’s an assumption that our PG has to cover the opposing PG. I can easily see Paul in a point-forward type role, where he’s not covering the opposing PG.

And I agree, Mulcahy needs to be in there more against a zone. Again, it’s only one game but the impression you get is that once the ball goes into Paul’s hands, something good is likely to happen.

 

[zebnatto]

I thought PM was our most impressive player last night.

 

[knights1212]

Mulcahy was very good. I have raved about him for 2 years. GRF thought he wouldn't be too good. What did he think of his game last night?

 

[YoucancallmeRay]

Mulcahy and Yeboah earned more PT based on last night, imo. Harper and Carter had an off games, Myles, Mathis, Young, Duke, and Geo were all so-so, even though most had some good moments. Caleb seemed lost. With that being said, I thought the team was fun to watch up to about halfway through the second half, despite many turnovers and poor decision making. It'll take a while for the team to find its identity but I expect them all to play up to the level we saw last year, hopefully sooner rather than later. First game anxiety, playing at home, against a team that hit a high level of three pointers. Still optimistic about the season.

 

[jtung230]

Do you guys really think Paul is able to turn the corner against B1G PGs and get to the lane?

 

[satnom]

I think PM has great size to be a distributor from the top of the key, foul line and inside the lanes. Once he develops a consistent shot inside the arc and paint he’s going to be a major problem for defenses. Don’t see him guarding quick point the length of court or one on one in man. Young can guard quick PGs but he has to distribute first and then look to score. He needs not to have another game like last night with TOs and selfish play.

Both bring something to the PG position on the offensive and defensive sides.

GO RU

 

[rcube1994]

Wenzel was talking about a player on another team where a coach told him the player is a lamborghini, without a steering wheel, he also said young doesnt want to be that type of player, good analogy.

 

[JDNB]

The way I saw it was , the RU players (Young inc)were taking the ball to the basket in traffic, instead of giving it off to a team mate that was open. PM sees the open man , and is a great passer, but did seem out of position on defense,at times.

 

[jtung230]

Based on the posts, it’s not a Young or Mulcahyquestion. They are not interchangeable. Very different skill sets.

 

[rufeelinit]

Need to see a longer body of work from both but they seem to be very different players. As bad as Young was with the ball last night, you can see where he might be effective against good man to man defenses given his speed and ability to get to the basket. May be one of our better players at creating his own shot. Again need to see more.

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

Do you guys really think Paul is able to turn the corner against B1G PGs and get to the lane?

Sure.. his height will get them up on him to defend his 3... anyone can use that with some ball movement. I do not think he can take a true point purely off the dribble.. but he doesn't have to.

Also, I cannot judge his "handle" yet.. but think of how Dooby got around guys. Not the most explosive athlete with quick first step.. he had a good handle and used the defender's motion against him. He was a clear threat from three.. off the dribble.. and he would show the defender the ball and get him to move with it as he dribbled.. then came a nice cross-over and he had the edge... the leverage to attack.