Jump to content

Rutgers Postgame Thread


KDB

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 297
  • Created
  • Last Reply

So I actually had never been to Kenpom or Sagarin.  Just tried to check them out, but too confusing for this guy and I'm thinking you have to pay if you want much?  Anyway, just for kicks, can anyone tell me what the predictors for the remaining games are?  How many are those sites predicting we will win from here?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, IUCrazy2 said:

I guess I wasn't paying good enough attention.  I noticed Young quite a bit and assumed Mathis was getting minutes too.

But...do you think he knew he was going to get that good of production from the guys he inserted into the line up?  Sometimes giving a guy a chance leads to good things too.  Lander got a decent amount of minutes and did ok for a freshman from my POV.  He had a guy jawing at him and responded by making a 3.  Sometimes effort is contagious.

Yes...I've watched Rutgers a lot over the past 2 years. I said in the pregame Johnson and Mulcahy were nice players that help you win. And that's what they needed. Young and Mathis were taking shots from Harper. They didn't need that. 

McConnell is a solid player too. A testament to Rutgers' depth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, NCHoosier32 said:

So I actually had never been to Kenpom or Sagarin.  Just tried to check them out, but too confusing for this guy and I'm thinking you have to pay if you want much?  Anyway, just for kicks, can anyone tell me what the predictors for the remaining games are?  How many are those sites predicting we will win from here?  

You do have to pay for some of it. You can see the offense and defense efficiency for free and where the team ranks as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, southsidehoosier said:

Looks at UM continuing to reel off wins. They might be the best team in the BIG the last 10 years.  We’re an average team at best right now 

Unfortunately we are bottom feeders. We need a culture change which unfortunately means a coaching change. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of you are too hard on Archie.  IU had enough chances.  For one, Within a 20 second stretch Hunter, who is a good FT shooter, went 0 for 2 and then immediately, after a steal (or T/O), missed an open lay up.  That’s four points.  Like I said earlier, they do just enough to almost or not win games that are certainly winnable.  I just don’t know if it’s all Archie’s fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IUguy said:

Some of you are too hard on Archie.  IU had enough chances.  For one, Within a 20 second stretch Hunter, who is a good FT shooter, went 0 for 2 and then immediately, after a steal (or T/O), missed an open lay up.  That’s four points.  Like I said earlier, they do just enough to almost or not win games that are certainly winnable.  I just don’t know if it’s all Archie’s fault.

That exchange was huge. I think Hunter missed another layup (though more contested) on the 3rd possession in that exchange as well. 

That changed the game in a big way. I think it was with about 6 minutes left or so and we would have tied in during that sequence but instead Rutgers brought it back to 9. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BGleas said:

That exchange was huge. I think Hunter missed another layup (though more contested) on the 3rd possession in that exchange as well. 

That changed the game in a big way. I think it was with about 6 minutes left or so and we would have tied in during that sequence but instead Rutgers brought it back to 9. 

Correct.  That was the biggest turning point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, BGleas said:

That exchange was huge. I think Hunter missed another layup (though more contested) on the 3rd possession in that exchange as well. 

That changed the game in a big way. I think it was with about 6 minutes left or so and we would have tied in during that sequence but instead Rutgers brought it back to 9. 

To me it isn’t those types of things...it’s that our margin for error is so small...we are constantly trying to claw back in a game or in a tight one. Sure good teams find ways to win games like that but better teams aren’t constantly in ball games like that. They build a cushion....they blow teams out occasionally but mostly they execute well enough against the middle of the pack or bottom dwellers to win comfortably. We just play well enough to be in almost every game but not so good to give ourselves a double digit cushion and withstands runs like that. Games like the Northwestern game and Rutgers etc...you let teams be in it late you are playing with fire...you are going to lose as many as you win. Simply put to me we just aren’t better than many teams in the B1G...we may be as good but we aren’t better. For a program like ours that just isn’t good enough. We need to either coach these kids up better or we need to get more talented players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, dgambill said:

What’s weird to me is that mostly all our basketball teams over the years take on the identity of its head coach. Knights teams, Davis, Sampson, Crean....but Archies teams...not so much...how is that possible??

Didn't realize that Sampson was a drug user and flunked a lot of his classes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

To me our main problem is that we don't have a pure scorer who can go get a basket when needed.  Also we don't have players who can drive to the basket and finish through contact.  We have to lead the country in miss shots at the basket.

I think Armaan can be that, but first the rolled ankle, then again getting dinged up again...and that was bothering him the whole game.

This time off hopefully gets him back to 100%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...