I think intimating we lost because Pike didn't do this or that is making more of an excuse.
RU Nemesis: Zone Defenses
- Thread starter BillyC80
- Start date
They were on fire. Crap happens. You shake Willis hand and move on. The bummer is that we dug ourselves in such a big hole early in the season that this one hurts. Had we won 2 of those games you move on and still feel good about yourselves. This game should not have move the needle one iota how we feel about this team. Unfortunately the NCAA probability needle has moved.
Fair disclosure I covertly watched 70% of this game with no sound on a iPhone and missed the 1st 14 minutes of the 2nd half.
this loss is bitter for me. Of all the losses this season even Lafayette I am having trouble getting over this one the most because it should not have happen but after the first few minutes the dye seemed cast. Pikiell most definitely deserves heat for this loss because it was avoidable and Johnson most certainly got the edge here. This game never should have gone down to last possessions and the blueprint of trying to play like this by grinding is going to leave you disappointed half the time.
It does necessarily change the NCAA needle though, this wasnt a must win, but it makes now winning at Northwestern and Nebby almost must wins unless you think RU can pull one off at Indiana or Michigan which would be better wins. Ultimately the team will have EVERY opportunity to play their way into the NCAA tournament. Do not feel sorry at all. This team controls its own destiny, its a matter of winning.
Our bench played 21% of our total minutes against Minnesota. They went 5/10 for 12 pts, 4 rb, 2 ast, 2 stl, 1 tov, 1 pf in 42 minutes.
Their bench played 6 minutes, going 0/3 for 0 pts, 0 rb, 0 ast, 0 stl, 2 tov, and 1 pf
Their two subs had played a total of 50 game minutes through 15 games this season, and we didn't try to force them onto the court? That's an offensive failure.
We had subs, and they didn't.... and we didn't exploit that.
Don't know why, btw - Pike's plan could have been to put more pressure inside, but our players didn't try to execute. Or Pike's plan could have been to just look for good outside shots and not pressure the paint (doubtful, but possible).
there seem to be certain points in the game that RU cannot sustain. Every big run we made was countered by a pretty good Minny run. Obviously you will not be able to sustain a 19-2 run and eventually Minny was going to get back into a flow. However we gave up an open 3 at halftime that put them in the lead because of not fouling before the shot, we had 3 fouls to give and Caleb got juked by a dork. You cannot go the last 6 minutes of the first half with just one fg......Minnesota was not playing vintage Chicago Bears defense. You cannot go 6 minutes in the 2nd half with no fg in crunch time. Thats just abominable basketball. Despite our recent offensive stats looking good shooting wise. We scored only 48 vs Iowa. We went through 3 scoring droughts vs Minny, we were awful vs Maryland offensively in the first half. This team is turning the ball over waaaaaay too much at this point. Centered mostly in the first half and they recover somewhat in the 2nd. If Geo wasnt hot from 3, this game could have been a double digit loss. Are we counting on Geo to make 3s like that...because everytime we think we can get consistency from him, we do not get it.
Harper had 31 at Maryland by just going off and Mulcahy 15, will that happen again....when will Geo and Ron both have strong offensive games. This team has a big head about itself when they win big games at home..almost always need to get a harsh reality check on the road.
Lets also talk about Pike calling that timeout after Geo was on a fire going up 60-57. RU didnt score for 6 minutes and Geo didnt get a shot for another 4 minutes or so and then missed a few. Why on earth would RU call timeout while Minny was obviously struggling on both ends.
Harper had 31 at Maryland by just going off and Mulcahy 15, will that happen again....when will Geo and Ron both have strong offensive games. This team has a big head about itself when they win big games at home..almost always need to get a harsh reality check on the road.
Lets also talk about Pike calling that timeout after Geo was on a fire going up 60-57. RU didnt score for 6 minutes and Geo didnt get a shot for another 4 minutes or so and then missed a few. Why on earth would RU call timeout while Minny was obviously struggling on both ends.
Wasn't Minnesota the favored team? People are making it seem like we blew the game or screwed things up. We ran in to a hot player. Time to move on.
There were missing Curry. The same guy who couldn't see the court the last few games. Maybe they weren't that much of a different team.
There were missing Curry. The same guy who couldn't see the court the last few games. Maybe they weren't that much of a different team.
The senseless turnovers particularly early I just don’t understand. Some passes you should never make. This game was there for the taking to your point. Big missed opportunity
Another opportunity in the second half was to play Cliff and Dean at the same time. We had no foul trouble to worry about. It would have given us more rebounding power and Dean is turning into a better offensive player than Cliff. It would have made Minnesota adjust on how they deal with 2 bigs. In fact Minnesota was playing Daniels and Thompson at the same time which helped with their rebounding.
I think i am taking this loss so hard because I am coming to the realization that this team just does not have enough depth or consistency to make that NCAA push.
The reality is we are a flawed team, especially offensively. We are ranked 180th in adjusted offensive efficiency. Our conference record in years we were that bad (180 or worse)....
2018 3-15
2017 3-15
2016 1-17
205 2-16
2009 2-16
2008 3-15
We all love Paul and Caleb. Tough to be an efficient offense in today's game with them being in the lineup together.
given Minny weakness and inexperience with their bigs, I was very disappointed that Cliff never got going and his hands were so bad this game. If RU was patient and disciplined they should have been able to shred them inside. I think as usual we turned it over first play and then 2nd play was an inexplicable 3 attempt from Caleb. Getting into holes early in the game on the road are our trademark and throws the gameplan out of wack...see Maryland and Penn State
I think in your heart of hearts you knew that before the game. Doesn't mean you can't/shouldn't play the game of win X amount games in Y amount of days and..........
well...whose responsibility is that???? Do not want to get on Pike too much...my criticism with him lies in recruiting and without question Jaden Jones was expected to contribute as a freshmen. If he stays he may still be a solid contributor, but for right now, its a big miss in recruiting given nothing else was brought in and I am frightened by next year. This isnt Douby leaving where we just had Inman, Webb, Farmer, Griffin. We truly are not returning much at all on offense.
I was getting too caught up in the ncaa talk here, even before the loss to Minnesota, RU wasnt even in the last dozen teams out.
No, the line swung in RU's favor once the extent of Minnesota's depletion was known. The closing Pinnacle line was Rutgers -233 / Minnesota +193 which implies a ~68% chance of Rutgers winning.
They were favored until the news broke of the missing players, and then the line swung rapidly to our favor. I think it was Minnesota -3.5 until the lineup was announced, then RU -4.5 shortly after.
that line was out before they knew 3 of 4 starters were out, beyond Curry their other 2 best players were out...come on yes we screwed up. we were playing one guy and a bunch of nobodies. We have one of the leading players in the league and everyone fawned over our offense vs Iowa, we shut down the best offensive player and teams in the league.
imagine RU playing without Cliff, Ron, Paul and Caleb and the opposing team basically had to defend Geo from going off..that is your equivalent
Agree - this was a game tailor made for Omoruyi to thrive, and we couldn't get him the ball.
He had Daniels (6-9, 230) on him much of the game, with Thompson (6-11, 190) on Harper. He should have been able to take advantage of that matchup, and if Thompson came down to help it would have left Harper open on the perimeter. Or, if we could have gotten Harper the ball in the paint and the zone collapsed on him, Omoruyi should have been an outlet for a dunk.
We didn't try any of that - we just passed around the outside and mostly took shots 15+ feet from the basket.
Our adjusted OE in this game was 124.9, which would be best in the country if we did it every game. This dissection of the offensive strategy is strange.
Even if we adjust out the better than normal 3p shooting I get an adjusted OE of 109.11 which is well above our average though fairly mediocre overall. That would put us at about 65th or 66th in offensive efficiency.
Another single metric, just like FIG is using.
Willis, Loewe and Thompson couldn't have hurt us from the bench. Our offense did nothing to attempt to put them there.
Most of this stuff just seems like the bargaining stage of grief to be perfectly honest. As I've said before, I am skeptical that changing your whole offensive philosophy based on them having a short bench is a smart idea.
Well, we went into a game favored, against a team missing 3 of its 4 best players, and lost. As this is a message board, people are discussing why that happened.
Saying "the offense and defense both played well" doesn't really fit with the result.
Statisticly the defense was bad, especially taking in to consideration who was out.
From watching secretly on my iphone Minnesota was making a bunch of stupid shots.
Admitedly it was tough getting emotionally involved for me. Maybe i'd feel differently if i sat on my couch for 2 hours.
It comes down to what we did or didn't do, and then trying to make assumptions as to why those things did or didn't happen. That's what message boards are - we have no control over what actually happens, but we talk about what happened and try to interpret the results.
Some key notes where we could have done a lot better:
- We allowed their sole incoming 3pt threat to get 13 3PA. If he shot his average, he'd still have walked away with 6 made threes. If Minnesota had its full complement of 3 guys shooting .375 or better, and it was pick-your-poison, we still would have picked someone other than Willis at .424
- We allowed a short handed team to play its starters for 98.5% of the game minutes without forcing any foul trouble or fatigue
- We got to the line the fewest number of times since 2016-17 (blowout loss @Purdue), and drew the 2nd fewest amount of fouls this season (the fewest drawn was in a blowout loss to Illinois)
- We allowed the worst PPP since the 2018-19 season
- We had the worst AdjD since the loss to the Bonnies in the 2019-20 season
Some key notes where we could have done a lot better:
- We allowed their sole incoming 3pt threat to get 13 3PA. If he shot his average, he'd still have walked away with 6 made threes. If Minnesota had its full complement of 3 guys shooting .375 or better, and it was pick-your-poison, we still would have picked someone other than Willis at .424
- We allowed a short handed team to play its starters for 98.5% of the game minutes without forcing any foul trouble or fatigue
- We got to the line the fewest number of times since 2016-17 (blowout loss @Purdue), and drew the 2nd fewest amount of fouls this season (the fewest drawn was in a blowout loss to Illinois)
- We allowed the worst PPP since the 2018-19 season
- We had the worst AdjD since the loss to the Bonnies in the 2019-20 season
I don't subscribe to the theory that not much can impact a 3 point percentage. I do think there is a ton of variability, but at the end of the day over 30+ games opponents 3pt FG % is a metric that says something.
The best way to impact 3P% is to keep the ball out of the hands of the players who shoot best from 3P range. If a team takes 24 3PA attempts, and 13 are from a guy shooting .424, their 3P% will be higher than if 13 are from a guy shooting .285
Have to deny guys like that the ball late in the shot clock, or double them. How many times was Douby doubled, or even tripled, and pushed 10+ feet out from the arc by a defense?
and if they werent really calling fouls and we only had 3 at halftime, why weren't we being uber aggressive on offense, we just allowed them to run their offense and assumed that eventually they would start missing but once teams are hot like they are in the zone
To be clear, we were favored because they were missing those players. Those are not two separate factors.
It can. There are two teams on the floor. It's not impossible for a team to be favored on average, play better than their average, and still lose.
I didn't make them two separate factors?
As they say, that's why they play the games. At the end of the day, we didn't do the things we needed to do to win, and Minnesota did. What could we have done differently, or do you think that winning this game was an impossibility?
To state it like this "Well, we went into a game favored, against a team missing 3 of its 4 best players", in my opinion, makes it sound as though this is supposed to be doubly bad. As in, NOT ONLY are we favored, BUT ALSO they are missing 3 of its 4 best players.
That may not be the message you are trying to send but, again in my opinion, that's how your post reads.
I think sometimes you just lose because the other team plays better than you. I'm sure that we didn't have the 100% perfect or optimal strategy but I think for the most part we executed a reasonable strategy reasonably well and that Minnesota just played really well. I don't really think that our coaching staff should look back on this game and think "we need to change this or that".
As bac pointed out above... they were missing their #1, #2, and #4 scorers on a team that already only had a rotation of 7 guys.
It would be like us going with Baker, McConnell, Mag, Hyatt, and Reiber for a full game. And then miraculously having the other team not try to get into the paint, allowing our guys to rest on defense and not pick up fouls.
We gave them a gift.
I don't think that strategy necessarily needs to change overall (any more than it does each game based on the scouting report), we just have to execute better. Our strategy all season has been to get into the paint, either to draw defenders and dump off for easy buckets/slams or to play inside/out for our shooters - we didn't really do that. This isn't the first game we've lost this year because an overmatched opponent threw a zone on us.
And, as always, when the refs aren't calling shooting fouls, you need to be more aggressive and physical defensively - and we didn't this time the way we did against Iowa.
It would be like us going with Baker, McConnell, Mag, Hyatt, and Reiber for a full game. And then miraculously having the other team not try to get into the paint, allowing our guys to rest on defense and not pick up fouls.
We gave them a gift.
I don't think that strategy necessarily needs to change overall (any more than it does each game based on the scouting report), we just have to execute better. Our strategy all season has been to get into the paint, either to draw defenders and dump off for easy buckets/slams or to play inside/out for our shooters - we didn't really do that. This isn't the first game we've lost this year because an overmatched opponent threw a zone on us.
And, as always, when the refs aren't calling shooting fouls, you need to be more aggressive and physical defensively - and we didn't this time the way we did against Iowa.
If there was ever a game you could make the case to go deeper into our bench, this was it. Just a couple of minutes each for: Miller’s defense, Agee scoring inside on their zone, and Palmquist scoring outside on their zone would have made sense. Instead we only played 8 against their 7, again giving them a break.
We’ve used those guys in much tougher matchups than this one. We could also have used more of our bench to press and trap, or to give our starters a breather so they would have the energy to press and trap, which we did not do until the end of the game, with some success.
We’ve used those guys in much tougher matchups than this one. We could also have used more of our bench to press and trap, or to give our starters a breather so they would have the energy to press and trap, which we did not do until the end of the game, with some success.
But c'mon.. that kind of hot 3-point shooting is not something you can expect. The comments about fouling that guy were valid... maybe we should have been more aggressive.. but he took some 30-footers... what can you do about that?