Pace saved the season

[snowboarder]

I agree, we are a better up tempo team.
One of the things coaches will do is try to impose objectives on the game.
Get the ball inside, get to the foul line, Slow it down, Etc
I believe we don't shoot well in stretches because we think too much about what we should be doing rather then just playing on instincts.
Example ( do i take the shot or do what the coach is asking me to do)
Ever notice that teams seem to make 3s when they have to shoot them at the end of games?

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

No shocker there. These kids are such a better team sped up. We also have some really good rhythm/transition 3 point shooters who arent so great when theyre shooting in a slow half court

Agree completely. We are much better at hitting 3s (perhaps even “good”) in transition. But when your not finishing the other types of transition buckets (including easy lay ups), those kick out 3s aren’t available to you as much. Trying to create them then creates turnovers - lots of them - with the passes back being intercepted for run outs the other way. And when you miss in transition it’s also much harder to get back on defense. There’s a time for playing fast and also a time for playing slow. We need to be able to do both depending on the match up.

 

[RUsojo]

@Yeah Baby @S_Janowski

Pace from cuse to Iowa 72.0 68.1 75.1 71.9 64.9 and then Iowa 72.3

Pace on the 5 game losing streak in order 72.3(should have won) 66.1 66.5 65.7 69.8

The slow down started after Iowa (Caleb came back 10 mins) and lost the next 4..

@Greene Rice FIG

 

[S_Janowski]

@Yeah Baby @S_Janowski

Pace from cuse to Iowa 72.0 68.1 75.1 71.9 64.9 and then Iowa 72.3

Pace on the 5 game losing streak in order 72.3(should have won) 66.1 66.5 65.7 69.8

The slow down started after Iowa (Caleb came back 10 mins) and lost the next 4..

@Greene Rice FIG

LOL dude can’t blame those 5 losses on Pace & McConnell when Young played more minutes than McConnell in each of those games we lost!

Then the next 4 games we win and McConnell plays more minutes than Young in 3 out of 4 of the wins.

Take your blinders off and stop just looking at stats that support your agenda man.

 

[RUsojo]

LOL dude can’t blame those 5 losses on Pace & McConnell when Young played more minutes than McConnell in each of those games we lost!

Then the next 4 games we win and McConnell plays more minutes than Young in 3 out of 4 of the wins.

Take your blinders off and stop just looking at stats that support your agenda man.

you’re literally not factoring in sos AT ALL

 

[S_Janowski]

you’re literally not factoring in sos AT ALL

And you’re not factoring in the common denominator lol.

I shouldn’t have to factor in SOS. I watched the games. I’m seriously questioning whether you watch the games in January.

It seems like if it was up to you we would have played more Young and Mathis in that 4 game stretch (that we won) and we could have easily lost all 4 the way the team was playing. Could have easily been a 9 game skid if Pikiell didn’t shake things up and start playing Baker and McConnell more.

As I keep saying, we have a very streaky team. It’s Pikiells job to find the right mix of players to give us the best chance to win. That mix is not always as clear cut as you keep trying to make it out to be.

And our success isn’t strictly dependent upon pace, as evidenced in some of the wins and losses we had this year.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

you’re literally not factoring in sos AT ALL

And you clearly don’t know the definition of PACE which is pretty laughable since you are the OP.

News flash - you can play fast and not score. Get it? The metric you should be looking at is shot attempts. It’s not perfect because of offensive boards but it’s a heck of a lot better than looking at points scored. Of course you win more when you put more points on the board. That is true for every single team.

 

[Yeah Baby]

you’re literally not factoring in sos AT ALL

You’re not factoring in our shooting at all. It made sense to slow it down when we couldn’t score. It made sense to open it up yesterday for sure.

Anither factor is shot selection, ball movement and turnovers. We were great yesterday in all phases (overall and not early on) so I say run every game as long as we do those things.I don’t disagree with you on the type of team we can be and probably should be. I just know we couldn’t hit water if we fell out of a fcking boat during our losing streak and it made sense to sow the game down and play great D and grind out wins so we can get to the tournament.

 

[RUsojo]

And you’re not factoring in the common denominator lol.

I shouldn’t have to factor in SOS. I watched the games. I’m seriously questioning whether you watch the games in January.

It seems like if it was up to you we would have played more Young and Mathis in that 4 game stretch (that we won) and we could have easily lost all 4 the way the team was playing. Could have easily been a 9 game skid if Pikiell didn’t shake things up and start playing Baker and McConnell more.

As I keep saying, we have a very streaky team. It’s Pikiells job to find the right mix of players to give us the best chance to win. That mix is not always as clear cut as you keep trying to make it out to be.

And our success isn’t strictly dependent upon pace, as evidenced in some of the wins and losses we had this year.

omg get out haha not factoring sos geez what is this the 50s

 

[RUsojo]

And you clearly don’t know the definition of PACE which is pretty laughable since you are the OP.

News flash - you can play fast and not score. Get it? The metric you should be looking at is shot attempts. It’s not perfect because of offensive boards but it’s a heck of a lot better than looking at points scored. Of course you win more when you put more points on the board. That is true for every single team.

newflash - WE SCORE WHEN WE PLAY FAST - WE WIN WHEN WE PLAY FAST

Of course the metric doesn’t mean that on its own. Pace doesn’t equal wins or points FOR ALL TEAMS. IT MEANS IT FOR THIS RUTGERS TEAM

god you guys are frustrating today

 

[RUsojo]

You’re not factoring in our shooting at all. It made sense to slow it down when we couldn’t score. It made sense to open it up yesterday for sure.

Anither factor is shot selection, ball movement and turnovers. We were great yesterday in all phases (overall and not early on) so I say run every game as long as we do those things.I don’t disagree with you on the type of team we can be and probably should be. I just know we couldn’t hit water if we fell out of a fcking boat during our losing streak and it made sense to sow the game down and play great D and grind out wins so we can get to the tournament.

we were scoring when we played fast

 

[S_Janowski]

omg get out haha not factoring sos geez what is this the 50s

And you’re not factoring in the common denominator which explicitly debunks your dumb theory.

Lol you stink at this man.

 

[S_Janowski]

newflash - WE SCORE WHEN WE PLAY FAST - WE WIN WHEN WE PLAY FAST

Of course the metric doesn’t mean that on its own. Pace doesn’t equal wins or points FOR ALL TEAMS. IT MEANS IT FOR THIS RUTGERS TEAM

god you guys are frustrating today

There have been a number of games this year where we have won and not scored a lot or played with a fast pace, again debunking this one size fits all/black and white theory by you.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

newflash - WE SCORE WHEN WE PLAY FAST - WE WIN WHEN WE PLAY FAST

Of course the metric doesn’t mean that on its own. Pace doesn’t equal wins or points FOR ALL TEAMS. IT MEANS IT FOR THIS RUTGERS TEAM

god you guys are frustrating today

We played fast against Michigan State (their place), Wisconsin, OSU (both games), PSU. We lost all of those games. It is a very likely that we wouldn’t have lost the Wisconsin game if we slowed the pace. For as bad as we were in the halfcourt sets they were so much worse and we rebounded the snot out of them. They won because they were able to score just enough off our missed transition attempts, there’s no other explanation.

 

[S_Janowski]

You’re not factoring in our shooting at all. It made sense to slow it down when we couldn’t score. It made sense to open it up yesterday for sure.

Anither factor is shot selection, ball movement and turnovers. We were great yesterday in all phases (overall and not early on) so I say run every game as long as we do those things.I don’t disagree with you on the type of team we can be and probably should be. I just know we couldn’t hit water if we fell out of a fcking boat during our losing streak and it made sense to sow the game down and play great D and grind out wins so we can get to the tournament.

If it was up to RUSojo we would have lost 9 straight. I seriously question whether he watched those games in January.

 

[RUsojo]

There have been a number of games this year where we have won and not scored a lot or played with a fast pace, again debunking this one size fits all/black and white theory by you.

yea there have been -mostly against weaker opponents ding ding ding

 

[RUsojo]

We played fast against Michigan State (their place), Wisconsin, OSU (both games), PSU. We lost all of those games. It is a very likely that we wouldn’t have lost the Wisconsin game if we slowed the pace. For as bad as we were in the halfcourt sets they were so much worse and we rebounded the snot out of them. They won because they were able to score just enough off our missed transition attempts, there’s no other explanation.

Wisconsin was one of the top slowest paced games dude one of the bottom four same with at Michigan St

 

[RUtrumpet92_rivals498139]

you’re literally not factoring in sos AT ALL

Loss at Michigan State: the whole team laid an egg. This was our WTF game.

Loss to Ohio State: this was another major disappointment after we were crushing them in Columbus prior to the Myles "fouls". We attempted eight more FG in this game than the one in Columbus but could not knock them down.

Loss vs. Wisconsin: this is a team that makes a deliberate effort to slow games down. We just could not shoot that night (2-7 FT, 2-19 from long range). Jacob scored 19, nobody else hit double digits.

Loss at Penn State: Looking back at the box score, we had four turnovers from Young with only 7 pts. Geo had three turnovers too.

We are averaging 70.2 possessions per game. Last year we were 69.7

Other B1G teams this season:
Nebraska 74.4 (interesting... could be a faster paced game Monday, which could help us out)
Illinois 73.7
Minnesota 73.5
Iowa 72.9
Penn State 72.6
Michigan State 71.8
Northwestern 71.7
Indiana 71.4
Michigan 70.9
Ohio State 69.3
Purdue 69.3
Wisconsin 67.9 <-- they slow EVERYBODY down.
Maryland 66.9

So we are 10th in the B1G in possessions per game. We are too slow to start our offensive sets in many of our games, and that leads to bad shots as the shot clock dwindles down. I don't feel we need to constantly run and gun to get better looks but hate when we go through long stretches of not even looking to attack or move the defense around for the first 15 seconds of a possession. We are better when we can get out in transition, no doubt about it, because we are not a great shooting team.

 

[S_Janowski]

yea there have been -mostly against weaker opponents ding ding ding

Okay even it it was “mostly weaker opponents” we still won.

But I’ll say it for the 10th time for ya:

You continue to completely ignore the fact that we were playing like crap to begin January with Young/Mathis getting more minutes than Baker/McConnell and turned it around and won 4 straight when Pikiell shook the lineup and slowed things down.

That was so obvious, regardless of who we were playing. Seriously, were you watching the games?

 

[RUsojo]

Okay even it it was “mostly weaker opponents” we still won.

But I’ll say it for the 10th time for ya:

You continue to completely ignore the fact that we were playing like crap to begin January with Young/Mathis getting more minutes than Baker/McConnell and turned it around and won 4 straight when Pikiell shook the lineup and slowed things down.

That was so obvious, regardless of who we were playing. Seriously, were you watching the games?

I can keep disproving this and link to the posts that do but just think we should be done here

 

[S_Janowski]

I can keep disproving this and link to the posts that do but just think we should be done here

Yep and I could do the same for yours. Agree to disagree.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Wisconsin was one of the top slowest paced games dude one of the bottom four same with at Michigan St

The point is that we tried to play fast in those games primarily with the line up you are advocating for and couldn’t beat them down the court in transition, missed bunnies or turned it over. That was your “fast paced” line up as the starting unit.

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

You’re not factoring in our shooting at all. It made sense to slow it down when we couldn’t score. It made sense to open it up yesterday for sure.

Completely disagree... shooters have to shoot. There's an article up somewhwre 9see heaven's thread of stories)... about Harper beating his slump. There's a quote from his dad about seeing box score with few shots by Junior... and he thinks.. "that's no way to get out of a slump.. something's wrong". paraphrasing.

We started the game 0-7 from three.. but we kept SHOOTING... that's the difference.. EAGERNESS to shoot the open three... instead of SHYNESS.. instead of FEAR.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Loss at Michigan State: the whole team laid an egg. This was our WTF game.

Loss to Ohio State: this was another major disappointment after we were crushing them in Columbus prior to the Myles "fouls". We attempted eight more FG in this game than the one in Columbus but could not knock them down.

Loss vs. Wisconsin: this is a team that makes a deliberate effort to slow games down. We just could not shoot that night (2-7 FT, 2-19 from long range). Jacob scored 19, nobody else hit double digits.

Loss at Penn State: Looking back at the box score, we had four turnovers from Young with only 7 pts. Geo had three turnovers too.

We are averaging 70.2 possessions per game. Last year we were 69.7

Other B1G teams this season:
Nebraska 74.4 (interesting... could be a faster paced game Monday, which could help us out)
Illinois 73.7
Minnesota 73.5
Iowa 72.9
Penn State 72.6
Michigan State 71.8
Northwestern 71.7
Indiana 71.4
Michigan 70.9
Ohio State 69.3
Purdue 69.3
Wisconsin 67.9 <-- they slow EVERYBODY down.
Maryland 66.9

So we are 10th in the B1G in possessions per game. We are too slow to start our offensive sets in many of our games, and that leads to bad shots as the shot clock dwindles down. I don't feel we need to constantly run and gun to get better looks but hate when we go through long stretches of not even looking to attack or move the defense around for the first 15 seconds of a possession. We are better when we can get out in transition, no doubt about it, because we are not a great shooting team.

When we finish the easy ones in transition, this is spot on. When we miss at a high rate our defense takes a major hit. Much harder to get the defense set after missed transition baskets than missed shots in the halfcourt game. That’s why it was wise to change the style while we were in the extended transition rut. Our defense improved drastically during that time period - you can’t argue about SOS there because Kempom is adjusted for that and the defensive efficiency numbers are what they are.

It was very promising to see us finally snap out of the transition funk , but ridiculous to attribute our sudden ineptitude to finish the run outs following the Iowa game to the return of one player whose addition has helped us tremendously on defense.

 

[RUsojo]

At this point I’m just glad Pike may have recognized it, and hopefully he sticks with it, because it’s not too late to go on a run in March.

 

[RutgHoops]

@Yeah Baby @S_Janowski

Pace from cuse to Iowa 72.0 68.1 75.1 71.9 64.9 and then Iowa 72.3

Pace on the 5 game losing streak in order 72.3(should have won) 66.1 66.5 65.7 69.8

The slow down started after Iowa (Caleb came back 10 mins) and lost the next 4..

@Greene Rice FIG

The only way this Rutgers team can push the "pace" is to outrebound our opponents. And it certainly greatly hinders the ability to push tempo when we are greatly outrebounded in a given game. Other than Young there really is no one on this roster capable of pushing tempo off opponent makes (imo). Rutgers lost the rebounding battle @. PSU by 14, @OSU by 20 and (home) OSU by 14, got out rebounded at MSU by 20, lost the rebounding battle to Iowa by 12 and 1 the two times we played them, and were outrebounded by 13 @ Michigan.

The only two games we lost and didn't lose the rebounding battle were Wisconsin and Maryland. If you add the Iowa -1 game to those two MD and Wisc. losses, our other six losses were games where Rutgers was outrebounded by double digits. The closest thing to a common denominator(imo) is in games where we couldn't push the tempo are games where we got beat (handily) on the glass.

So, in my opinion it wasn't that "strategy" as it relates to pace was different, but rather we couldn't push tempo because we couldn't take advantage of opponent misses (by not getting rebounds).

 

[RUsojo]

The only way this Rutgers team can push the "pace" is to outrebound our opponents. And it certainly greatly hinders the ability to push tempo when we are greatly outrebounded in a given game. Other than Young there really is no one on this roster capable of pushing tempo off opponent makes (imo). Rutgers lost the rebounding battle @. PSU by 14, @OSU by 20 and (home) OSU by 14, got out rebounded at MSU by 20, lost the rebounding battle to Iowa by 12 and 1 the two times we played them, and were outrebounded by 13 @ Michigan.

The only two games we lost and didn't lose the rebounding battle were Wisconsin and Maryland. If you add the Iowa -1 game to those two MD and Wisc. losses, our other six losses were games where Rutgers was outrebounded by double digits. The closest thing to a common denominator(imo) is in games where we couldn't push the tempo are games where we got beat (handily) on the glass.

So, in my opinion it wasn't that "strategy" as it relates to pace was different, but rather we couldn't push tempo because we couldn't take advantage of opponent misses (by not getting rebounds).

Indiana had a higher offensive rebound percentage AND defensive percentage than Rutgers last night...

forcing more misses does help transition though - which we did well - but we did push the ball in this misses way more than we normally do. Which was great to see.

 

[Yeah Baby]

we were scoring when we played fast

Right but we were losing so we slowed it down. It was the right thing to do even though I prefer the up tempo. Open your mind.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Had Pike decided to continue playing Paul and McConnell close to 30 than not playing Geo as much in favor of young/Mathis would definitely be a good solution.

Didn’t Duke play 5-6 minutes in Caleb’s place to start the game in garbage time?

 

[bethlehemfan]

Shot making makes coaches look smart and vice versa. Our guys stepped up. Geo and Ron were men last night. That’s what we needed. If they play like that the rest of the way it will be a fun finish. I think they will.