For those who understand basketball...

[zazoo2002]

I'm amazed at the progress Pike has made, particularly this season, and am curious - for those who truly know the game of basketball, what's Pike's secret?

I realize that basketball is much easier to turn-around than football. But, for those that believe it's the Jimmies and the Joes, Pike's recruiting - at least on paper - hasn't been particularly special. To my untrained eye, he recruits a very specific type of player: long, high-IQ, above average athletes, who are somewhat position-less and highly coachable - they must completely buy into the team's defense-first identity. The offense is secondary, but as we've seen, considerable progress is made each season. Even the 2020 class has been surprisingly - with the APC - pedestrian. Yet, I think 2 of the 3 recruits have the ability to be good to very good players.

I'm just amazed at how deep and versatile this team is; how they have seamlessly plugged and played after Geo's injury; how after probably the worst half of basketball this season (against PSU), they dominated the second half in every facet. I was at the game...and my pre-game flash take was - PSU 'appears' to be bigger, stronger, and faster. But it's hard to quantify heart. The stats painted a very encouraging picture. So, what am I missing? Did I answer my own question?

 

[Scarlet83]

I'm amazed at the progress Pike has made, particularly this season, and am curious - for those who truly know the game of basketball, what's Pike's secret?

I realize that basketball is much easier to turn-around than football. But, for those that believe it's the Jimmies and the Joes, Pike's recruiting - at least on paper - hasn't been particularly special. To my untrained eye, he recruits a very specific type of player: long, high-IQ, above average athletes, who are somewhat position-less and highly coachable - they must completely buy into the team's defense-first identity. The offense is secondary, but as we've seen, considerable progress is made each season. Even the 2020 class has been surprisingly - with the APC - pedestrian. Yet, I think 2 of the 3 recruits have the ability to be good to very good players.

I'm just amazed at how deep and versatile this team is; how they have seamlessly plugged and played after Geo's injury; how after probably the worst half of basketball this season (against PSU), they dominated the second half in every facet. I was at the game...and my pre-game flash take was - PSU 'appears' to be bigger, stronger, and faster. But it's hard to quantify heart. The stats painted a very encouraging picture. So, what am I missing? Did I answer my own question?

Yes, at the core you really did a good job of answering your own question. While Pike has unsuccessfully recruited 5 stars. Pike’s staff is very good, and getting coachable, hungry players where he and the staff can really develop the player has been Pike’s secret sauce. These coaches spend a lot of extra time and energy finding the coachable, hungry kid who has a lot of upside potential. IMO, its an intangible quality in a kid that is highly underrated in this world of how many recruiting stars and websites.

 

[Upstream]

You answered your own question. Pike, while not recruiting a team of superstars, is recruiting players that fit his system and style, and these players are smart and coachable. Also, Pike is a defense-first coach, so our defense is great and our offense not so much. We have only won one game this season (Bryant) where we allowed the other team to score more than 66 points, and we have not lost any where we held the other team to less than 66.

I realize that basketball is much easier to turn-around than football.

I completely disagree with your claim that basketball is much easier to turn around than football.

There are much fewer basketball recruits than football recruits, and more teams going after them. It is much harder for a basketball coach to find an under-recruited gem. It is much easier for a football coach to find under-recruited players and take a chance on them.

Plus, a basketball team has only 13 scholarships, with 5 (38%) on the court at a time. Football has 85 scholarships, with 11 (13%) on the field at a time. And in football, since you alternate between offense and defense, you don't have to go beyond your first string to give players a break. You can play a football game with less than a third of of your scholarship players seeing the field, and rarely will more than half see the field, except in garbage time. In basketball, you need to rotate your players, so you almost always have to give 70% of the scholarship players significant time. This means in football you can take a chance on recruiting lots of players with potential, and if they don't work out you can put them on the third string. In basketball, it is a lot harder to take a chance on a bunch of players with potential and sit them if they don't work out. Once you are above 2-3, you impact the depth of your team and rotation options for foul trouble or injuries.

It also isn't true that you only need one star to turn around a basketball team. Sure a star can elevate a really good team to a great team, but it can't turn a mediocre team into a great team. (This is also true in football, where a star QB or RB can elevate a team, but can't turn around a bad team by himself.)

What is true is that upsets are more common in basketball than football. So it was possible for a bad Rutgers team under Eddie Jordan a few years ago to upset a top-10 Wisconsin team. But that doesn't mean the program was turned around, or that a bad team is consistently going to upset top teams.

 

[RU-Choppin-Ohio]

It's what he said when he was hired.....Under the radar recruits that will embrace the challenge. Guys like Baker, McConnell, Johnson, Harper, etc.

Great initial step to be competitive. Next step is a higher level of recruit in the years to come starting with Cliff Omoruyi.

 

[Randal7]

Continuity. Team. These guys play for eachother and trust eachother. And the newcomers (yeboah and mulcahy) have off the charts bball IQ and slid right into the team dynamic. Its a beautiful thing when a bball team achieves the sort of harmony weve got here now

 

[Goku]

I hope this thread doesn't veer off course and become a debate on whether football or basketball is easier to turn around. You can make another thread to debate that again if you want to.

But to answer the OP, you did answer your own question and you explained it really nicely.

Think about how this team played at home against Penn State on New Years Day 3 seasons ago. Rutgers got blown out by PSU. We played iso-basketball on offense, hoisted tons of bricks, and looked unwatchable. It wasn't a Pike team yet. It needed his type of player.

I don't to make this a debate about Corey again, but this was why we many of us were happy to see him go. His departure would bring us to this point much faster.

In year 4, this team looks so much different. Pike is playing position-less basketball that we see the game moving to. Pike wants shooters. He knows the value of the 3pt shot in basketball. But since we are not a great 3pt-shooting team, he has them seeing the value of dominating the paint and winning a different way. I think when Pike really gets it right, and he has a sure-thing NCAA team, he will have a collection of players that can shoot a little better from 3pt.

 

[Lawboy]

Pikiell has a certain type of player that he is looking for. Hungry, high hoops IQ, good soldier, under recruited, and room for growth. They come as two and three stars but there are any number of four and five stars that would fit that description. To win consistently you need some of these. Harper and Mulcahy were both three when recruited and four by the time they got here. Luck or a good eye for talent? Just need to take the next step and get the high three and low four and see a quantum leap after signing.

 

[kcg88]

(Offense)
Turnovers - We were 224th last season, we're 214th this season
Rebounding - We were 34th last season, we're 26th this season
2-point % - We were 285th last season, we're 39th this season
3-point % - We were 312th last season, we're 328th this season
Free throw % - We were 341st last season, we're 296th this season

(Defense)
Turnovers - We were 245th last season, we're 87th this season
Rebounding - We were 118th last season, we're 33rd this season
2-point % - We were 51st last season, we're 19th this season
3-point % - We were 226th last season, we're 93rd this season

I've bolded the four most important factors. 2-point percentage has been a team effort, but Myles Johnson is the anchor here. He's incredibly efficient inside. Geo Baker and Caleb McConnell were at 37% and 46% last season... This year they're at 55% and 54%.

Will it continue? Probably not at such a high rate, but it's clearly better than a season ago.

Defensively, I'd raise some yellow (not red) flags about the improvement in the turnover rate and the 3-point percentage. We beefed up our turnover numbers against some poor competition. In conference play I expect us to be middle of the pack, which is still an improvement over last year but only a modest one.

And a lot of 3-point defense is luck. In 2018, teams shot poorly against us. In 2019, they shot great. This year it's back to relatively poorly. Obviously the defense has something to do with this, but variance is such a strong factor and it gets overlooked.

The defensive rebounding seems to be for real, although it will have a major test against Illinois. They're #4 in the country in terms of offensive rebounding, though like our turnover numbers this is juiced up by a weak OOC. They're #4 in conference play only, though, so it'll still be quite the test.

 

[RUich]

Way too often, superstar players are not team players. I think this starts from the first time they shoot the ball. They have always been THE player and the game orbited around them. They were unstoppable by the mere mortals that tried to do it.
Fast forward to the college level and, all of a sudden, it ain't so easy anymore. Now this star needs help and he isn't built for it.
Pike is a top shelf coach that knows what he is doing.

 

[kapyoche]

Didn't Rhule turn around Baylor? So I don't agree that it is hard to turn around a football team.
I think coaching has a lot to do with getting the players to believe in your system and then execute.
It's not that complicated.

 

[Goku]

(Offense)
Turnovers - We were 224th last season, we're 214th this season
Rebounding - We were 34th last season, we're 26th this season
2-point % - We were 285th last season, we're 39th this season
3-point % - We were 312th last season, we're 328th this season
Free throw % - We were 341st last season, we're 29th this season

(Defense)
Turnovers - We were 245th last season, we're 87th this season
Rebounding - We were 118th last season, we're 33rd this season
2-point % - We were 51st last season, we're 19th this season
3-point % - We were 226th last season, we're 93rd this season

I've bolded the four most important factors. 2-point percentage has been a team effort, but Myles Johnson is the anchor here. He's incredibly efficient inside. Geo Baker and Caleb McConnell were at 37% and 46% last season... This year they're at 55% and 54%.

Will it continue? Probably not at such a high rate, but it's clearly better than a season ago.

Defensively, I'd raise some yellow (not red) flags about the improvement in the turnover rate and the 3-point percentage. We beefed up our turnover numbers against some poor competition. In conference play I expect us to be middle of the pack, which is still an improvement over last year but only a modest one.

And a lot of 3-point defense is luck. In 2018, teams shot poorly against us. In 2019, they shot great. This year it's back to relatively poorly. Obviously the defense has something to do with this, but variance is such a strong factor and it gets overlooked.

The defensive rebounding seems to be for real, although it will have a major test against Illinois. They're #4 in the country in terms of offensive rebounding, though like our turnover numbers this is juiced up by a weak OOC. They're #4 in conference play only, though, so it'll still be quite the test.

I think you should highlight the free throw % going up too! If we are going to play in the paint, we are going to shoot a lot of free throws. And this season we are respectable in that area. That has to result in a couple of more wins this year.

 

[kcg88]

I think you should highlight the free throw % going up too! If we are going to play in the paint, we are going to shoot a lot of free throws. And this season we are respectable in that area. That has to result in a couple of more wins this year.

Oops, that was a typo. We only went from 341st to 296th, not 29th.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

DEFENSE and CHEMISTRY

The secret sauce could be the way he treats his players.

I don't think he is doing it by having more "talent" than the opposition.

 

[bowlgoal]

DEFENSE and CHEMISTRY

The secret sauce could be the way he treats his players.

I don't think he is doing it by having more "talent" than the opposition.

He’s not. Each great team and I’ll call Michigan state a great team has one player (maybe two) who are at a different level. They have Winston and without him, they are good but not great. He’s the five star talent. We need one scorer like him and we’d be close. Illinois has a five star guard who we have to face on Saturday. Indians has a five star freshman but the rest of their team is not as talented as Michigan state. Michigan has two or three guys that are slightly below Winston but with livers, they are dangerous.

 

[BigRnj]

He stays at a Holiday Inn Express when he travels.

 

[miketd1]

1. Get the best players he can get
2. Coach ‘em up
3. Tailor Xs & Os to team’s strength
4. Win some games
5. Use momentum to recruit players suited to preferred scheme
6. Coach them up
7. Win more games
8. Use that momentum to build a critical mass of your preferred players
9. Implement preferred playing style
10. Win big

 

[RUBigFrank]

Many on this board have been over obsessed with our three point shooting - which for many other teams is a mainstay. This team does not need troikas to win - and actually does better with less attempts - 10 tries against the Nits.

 

[RUBigFrank]

One thing I like to see down the stretch is more emphasis on a press to wear teams down as the season grinds along. Likely best when Geo returns

 

[RUPete]

It is not much easier to turn around basketball. It's a myth. They are both difficult to turn around if you don't make the right hire or don't have the necessary institutional support. The whole scholarship #s thing is ridiculous. It's all in proportion to what you need to field a team in each sport. In fact, you can argue that you get many less mulligans in basketball recruiting.

 

[Big boy stan]

As a disciple of Calhoun, Pike's scheme is D and rebound and then score just enough to win. We have seen that for years. Defense and rebounding is more about want to and effort then offense. Good, hungry, coachable, 3 star recruits with a good coach can win games this way.

With that said, for me, the fact that our 2 pt offense is as effective as it is, is the difference in the season.

 

[Upstream]

In fact, you can argue that you get many less mulligans in basketball recruiting.

I did argue that, both in terms of pure numbers and as a percentage of scholarships.

 

[G- RUnit]

Didn't Rhule turn around Baylor? So I don't agree that it is hard to turn around a football team.
I think coaching has a lot to do with getting the players to believe in your system and then execute.
It's not that complicated.

It's far easier to make a bowl game than to make hoops post season.
Hoops is so much more difficult.

 

[RUPete]

I did argue that, both in terms of pure numbers and as a percentage of scholarships.

Sorry- went back and saw that. I kind of shut off after I read that first line about it being much easier to turn around a basketball program. That claim has driven me nuts over the years.

 

[StyleKnight]

A big part is how good Myles Johnson is and how much he has developed. In my opinion he is the key to everything we do. The guards we can plug and play somewhat as they all have pluses and minuses. We wouldn't be able to replace Johnson the same way. As long as he stays healthy we will be good. Another key has been the development of Ron Harper Jr., he gets better and better every game.

 

[RU-ROCS]

He’s not. Each great team and I’ll call Michigan state a great team has one player (maybe two) who are at a different level. They have Winston and without him, they are good but not great. He’s the five star talent. We need one scorer like him and we’d be close. Illinois has a five star guard who we have to face on Saturday. Indians has a five star freshman but the rest of their team is not as talented as Michigan state. Michigan has two or three guys that are slightly below Winston but with livers, they are dangerous.

I mostly agree, but it is a fine line with 5-stars. Sometimes when there's only one 5-star on a team they wreck the chemistry, which is a real challenge to the coach. I think that has been IU's problem, as they've had a couple of one-and-done's the last few years and have not succeeded with them. If Pike can keep adding high-character 4-star talent, like Mathis, Harper and Mulcahy, I think he can elevate RU to the top-third of the conference. Omoruyi would be a huge boost if Pike can land him, as he would be the highest rated 4 star to date.

 

[RUDieHard]

A few reasons from my perspective:

1. We have a TEAM this year. The players know their roles and play unselfishly. It's a thing of beauty when you see a team play as a TEAM. It's part of the reason why people were getting so frustrated with JY early on because he was playing too selfishly. It's another reason why everyone loves Mulcahy (bc he's a pass first player who makes others around him better).

2. Myles Johnson is by far the best big man we've had on the banks in a long time. His offensive efficiency and defensive prowess really helps stabilize our backline.

3. Team camaraderie seems to be at an all time high.

4. Our coach staff is top notch (although I'll admit, I don't know much about Hayne).

5. Our schedule has been friendly to us which has allowed us to develop momentum. February will be brutal but if we keep winning and playing with confidence, who knows.

 

[Big boy stan]

Plus, a basketball team has only 13 scholarships, with 5 (38%) on the court at a time. Football has 85 scholarships, with 11 (13%) on the field at a time.

While technically true, number of starters in probably more relevant. I would say 13 scholies with 5 starters for BBall (38%) and 85 scholies with 22 starters for football (26%).

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

This team does not need troikas to win - and actually does better with less attempts - 10 tries against the Nits.

I love what is happening.....there is a ceiling if you can't make 3s. Right now statisticly we have a 18-2 defense and a 5-15 offense. At some point in the future we need to make 3s.

 

[zazoo2002]

You answered your own question. Pike, while not recruiting a team of superstars, is recruiting players that fit his system and style, and these players are smart and coachable. Also, Pike is a defense-first coach, so our defense is great and our offense not so much. We have only won one game this season (Bryant) where we allowed the other team to score more than 66 points, and we have not lost any where we held the other team to less than 66.



I completely disagree with your claim that basketball is much easier to turn around than football.

There are much fewer basketball recruits than football recruits, and more teams going after them. It is much harder for a basketball coach to find an under-recruited gem. It is much easier for a football coach to find under-recruited players and take a chance on them.

Plus, a basketball team has only 13 scholarships, with 5 (38%) on the court at a time. Football has 85 scholarships, with 11 (13%) on the field at a time. And in football, since you alternate between offense and defense, you don't have to go beyond your first string to give players a break. You can play a football game with less than a third of of your scholarship players seeing the field, and rarely will more than half see the field, except in garbage time. In basketball, you need to rotate your players, so you almost always have to give 70% of the scholarship players significant time. This means in football you can take a chance on recruiting lots of players with potential, and if they don't work out you can put them on the third string. In basketball, it is a lot harder to take a chance on a bunch of players with potential and sit them if they don't work out. Once you are above 2-3, you impact the depth of your team and rotation options for foul trouble or injuries.

It also isn't true that you only need one star to turn around a basketball team. Sure a star can elevate a really good team to a great team, but it can't turn a mediocre team into a great team. (This is also true in football, where a star QB or RB can elevate a team, but can't turn around a bad team by himself.)

What is true is that upsets are more common in basketball than football. So it was possible for a bad Rutgers team under Eddie Jordan a few years ago to upset a top-10 Wisconsin team. But that doesn't mean the program was turned around, or that a bad team is consistently going to upset top teams.

Great response!! I'm still incredulous how lightly recruited most of these guys were and yet, on any given night, nearly any one of them has the ability to go off!! I started to write a bit about each player - Geo's leadership, Myles recent double-double, Caleb's dime dropper, Paul's maturity, Jacob's development, RHJ...simple point is, this high-character team is very deep, very well coached and great fun to watch!