Guess the rotation

[RUfan1977]

I think you are pretty level headed in expectations, but I've seen its Pikes best team, 20+ wins, ect.
Yes, no doubt, bringing back the biggest contributors from last year is good, even though we were terrible. Another year of development, experience, and chemistry together are all positives. Not relying on many freshman for first time in a few years is a positive. Bringing in age and performance at lower levels is a positive.

All that said, a bunch still has to go right. Gurdak has to add a lot in team defense to make up for rim protection he won't provide and needs to provide rebounding. Syndor is really a mystery, and hes vital. Smith needs to provide points some playmaking and rebounding as hes awful defensively. Smith is kinda Buchannon, solid all around but not great at anything. Neither center are useful if they have to defend the perimeter. Need a defending front court player still.

There are possibilities here, that at least makes the team interesting.

Want to quibble a little with your comparison of Smith and Buchanan who are very different players, with Smith more of a scorer (20.7 per game) and Buchanan a better defender, but overall agree with you that this team has potential if things go right.

 

[seansherm]

Actually - Pike’s best statistical team brought back players coming off a similar season to the one we just had (2018-19). Most of them (RHJ, MJ, Tez, and Caleb) took significant steps forward from their debut seasons while Geo remained steady. Only Kiss disappointed. Yeboah and JY were able to have an impact as transfers and Paul played a role as a frosh. A lot went right, to your point… But again, returning players did improve significantly year over year.

I’m also confused by your comparison of Darin Smith to Buchanan. They are very different style players (arguably polar opposites). Buchanan is a much better defender, but Darin Smith easily qualifies as the best statistical incoming D1 three point sharp shooter we’ve had (on paper) since Cam Spencer. Over 2 seasons, he averaged over 40% efficiency from 3 on high volume (he made 93 threes over 2 seasons - Buchanan only ATTEMPTED a total of 105 threes over 3 seasons, for perspective). If one wants to be contrarian, the bust scenerio to point to on Smith would be a PJ Hayes situation. But Smith has a lot going for him comparatively - for starters, really all PJ did at San Diego was shoot 3s. He only made 32 twos on the entire season, couldn’t handle the ball and didn’t get to the line that much. Smith can handle the rock well, gets to the line a ton and scores in a variety of ways in addition to his perimeter shooting. He’s also a much better rebounder on paper than PJ despite his overall poor defense. So there’s at least reason to hope he’ll turn out much better. But regardless, very different from Buchanan.

That was a mistake, I meant Jones, not Smith is similar to Buchannon.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

That was a mistake, I meant Jones, not Smith is similar to Buchannon.

Yes and no. Yes maybe only in the sense of their paper efficiency metrics for their positions (defense included - obviously Buchanan’s metrics are proven at the high major level). But they don’t play similar styles and the things Jones is best at typically translate pretty well. That’s the good news with him.

Jones, like Smith, is a high volume three point shooter. Over only 2 seasons he attempted 390 threes while hitting 35.4% of them. Not as high efficiency, but it’s very solid considering the number of attempts. He has 138 MADE 3s over two seasons compared to Buchanan’s 105 attempts over 3 seasons. Jones (like Smith) also can handle the ball with his left hand (which Buchanan struggles with) and unlike Smith, doesn’t appear to be a liability on defense. Again - no guarantees.

 

[RUJMM78]

Bottom line Pikiell can't play favorites because a winning season is a absolute must for his tenure at Rutgers.Improvement in rebounding,defense and coaching a half.court offense will tell the story about team success.

 

[seansherm]

Yes and no. Yes maybe only in the sense of their paper efficiency metrics for their positions (defense included - obviously Buchanan’s metrics are proven at the high major level). But they don’t play similar styles and the things Jones is best at typically translate pretty well. That’s the good news with him.

Jones, like Smith, is a high volume three point shooter. Over only 2 seasons he attempted 390 threes while hitting 35.4% of them. Not as high efficiency, but it’s very solid considering the number of attempts. He has 138 MADE 3s over two seasons compared to Buchanan’s 105 attempts over 3 seasons. Jones (like Smith) also can handle the ball with his left hand (which Buchanan struggles with) and unlike Smith, doesn’t appear to be a liability on defense. Again - no guarantees.

Not comparing their games, just that they are decent across the board, not great at anything, not real awful (outside DB free throws) at anything. Don't usually hurt you too much, but will be inconsistent

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Not comparing their games, just that they are decent across the board, not great at anything, not real awful (outside DB free throws) at anything. Don't usually hurt you too much, but will be inconsistent

I disagree. 36.7% from three has to count as better than just “decent” on a sample of 198 attempts. Volume matters. When BAC asked if there was a “catch” this is probably where he’s coming from. For whatever reason, RU historically hasn’t seemed to appeal to the 3 and D type transfers. Jones certainly qualifies as that. When you add in that he can handle the ball and is a pretty good rebounder those are just added bonuses.

The addition of Jones provides a lot more confidence the perimeter D will be much better per 40. We played a 3 guard line up at least half a game last season. While defensive efficiency metrics aren’t all that reliable, it’s a very safe bet Jones comes in better than either Powers or Zrno performed at the 3 last season. We have a fan predicting Powers will do great things by his senior year - who knows, maybe he’ll do a 180 on D and earn PT at the 3 as a result. Either way - whatever we put on the floor this year at the 3 alongside a 2 small guard line up (when we play it) is going to be better than our options last year now. Jones all but ensures this. Yes - it’s a jump up in competition, but Jones is still an experienced D1 player who graded out well on D. Jordan was a unique situation where his D metrics at Merrimack were propped up by being elite at one specific skill that fit the coach’s zone scheme. His defensive drop was the exception not the rule for this reason and even still, Jordan still would’ve been materially better on D than the guards we played there last year. The bar for improvement was low. Smith at the 3 did not breed promise of improvement though. Jones definitely does. Usually the advanced indiv metrics for backcourt defense are reliable enough to predict concerns for who could be unplayable at the high major level. Jones won’t be that.