Offense Was More Crisp With Caleb Out

[goru7]

Agreed on 58 points not being indicative of how good we were offensively. Pace matters and Wisconsin plays slow
Caleb is bad at other things offensively besides just missing shots - bad reads/decision making, bad ball movement, bad movement away from the ball, over dribbles etc.

Caleb is good at driving , Caleb is good at hitting his mid range shot especially when he backs guys down in the post. Caleb can hit the 3 when the ball is swung around and he is open. He can get fouled and hit 75% of his foul shots. That should give you 10-16 points a game.
Caleb should not be going one on one from the foul line or above. Caleb should not be over dribbling . Caleb should not be jacking 3’s especially early in the shot clock. A lot of lousy things Caleb has done offensively was due to Paul refusing to shoot and Cam being inconsistent and in slumps this year. Couple that with Cliff’s inconsistency in the post and therefore someone had to score and Caleb thought it was him but his arsenal is not conducive to one on one or three point shooting so there has been a failure. But do the things I mentioned above and that will be crucial to our winning more games.

 

[Scangg]

If Cam was off we would have had the crispiest 45 points ever

There was some better ball movement early in the first half though. We need better ball and player movement

 

[RUsojo]

Caleb is good at driving , Caleb is good at hitting his mid range shot especially when he backs guys down in the post. Caleb can hit the 3 when the ball is swung around and he is open. He can get fouled and hit 75% of his foul shots. That should give you 10-16 points a game.
Caleb should not be going one on one from the foul line or above. Caleb should not be over dribbling . Caleb should not be jacking 3’s especially early in the shot clock. A lot of lousy things Caleb has done offensively was due to Paul refusing to shoot and Cam being inconsistent and in slumps this year. Couple that with Cliff’s inconsistency in the post and therefore someone had to score and Caleb thought it was him but his arsenal is not conducive to one on one or three point shooting so there has been a failure. But do the things I mentioned above and that will be crucial to our winning more games.

What?

Caleb is a career 26% 3 point shooter.

He gets to the line fewer than twice game in his career - his minutes have gone up substantially and is only getting to like 2.3/game.

His “best shot” is the least efficient shot in basketball that should be reserved for end game situations.

Play D, get put backs and cutting layups, and play within the team concept. Anything more is a detriment to the team. DISCLAIMER - Overall he is not a detriment.

 

[goru7]

What?

Caleb is a career 26% 3 point shooter.

He gets to the line fewer than twice game in his career - his minutes have gone up substantially and is only getting to like 2.3/game.

His “best shot” is the least efficient shot in basketball that should be reserved for end game situations.

Play D, get put backs and cutting layups, and play within the team concept. Anything more is a detriment to the team. DISCLAIMER - Overall he is not a detriment.

You are lost. If you think getting 2 pts from Paul and 2 points from Caleb is going to win you games ( Indiana ) then you know jack about our team. 2 starting guards in the Big 10 have to be giving you about 10 a game. Getting put backs ( rare ) get him to 14-16 but that might be an outlier or 1 or 2 times a year

 

[SirPerceval]

Caleb going forward should be our Mag guy. Killer D, limited O only when good opportunities present themselves.

If Caleb is Mag who is going to be Caleb?

 

[Shelby65]

What?

Caleb is a career 26% 3 point shooter.

He gets to the line fewer than twice game in his career - his minutes have gone up substantially and is only getting to like 2.3/game.

His “best shot” is the least efficient shot in basketball that should be reserved for end game situations.

Play D, get put backs and cutting layups, and play within the team concept. Anything more is a detriment to the team. DISCLAIMER - Overall he is not a detriment.

Actually he probably is. He misses shots or turns it over more than the scoring he prevents. Same as Myles Johnson did. Bill Russell he isn’t.

 

[Arizona Knight]

Actually he probably is. He misses shots or turns it over more than the scoring he prevents. Same as Myles Johnson did. Bill Russell he isn’t.

So Caleb and Myles are/were a detriment to this team. Am I possibly reading this correctly?

 

[MiloTalon13]

What?

Caleb is a career 26% 3 point shooter.

He gets to the line fewer than twice game in his career - his minutes have gone up substantially and is only getting to like 2.3/game.

His “best shot” is the least efficient shot in basketball that should be reserved for end game situations.

Play D, get put backs and cutting layups, and play within the team concept. Anything more is a detriment to the team. DISCLAIMER - Overall he is not a detriment.

He’s a plus offensive rebounder and good at finishing around the hoop good baseline post/turnaround.shot Below avg B1G guard/wing in every other way offensively

 

[MiloTalon13]

Also would bet Caleb came back because he was promised he’d get more shots. Which is understandable we are better because he came back

 

[-RUFAN4LIFE-]

Also would bet Caleb came back because he was promised he’d get more shots. Which is understandable we are better because he came back

I don’t think he was promised more shots by Pike. There’s more to go around with Geo & RHJ having moved on.

Not sure what impact the preseason injury is having on his season. The back issue could be related to the earlier injury. It’s possible he re-aggravated it to the point he couldn’t play against Wisconsin.

 

[cm_13]

So Caleb and Myles are/were a detriment to this team. Am I possibly reading this correctly?

Also Caleb and/or Myles are not Bill Russell. Because that was apparently something that needed to be said.

 

[Arizona Knight]

Also Caleb and/or Myles are not Bill Russell. Because that was apparently something that needed to be said.

I’m trying to give him the benefit of a doubt and figure I may be misinterpreting his post. Otherwise that has to be the worst take I may have ever read on these boards.

 

[Shelby65]

I’m trying to give him the benefit of a doubt and figure I may be misinterpreting his post. Otherwise that has to be the worst take I may have ever read on these boards.

it's not as simple as is "he a detriment Y/N ?": what I meant is, yes, when he abandons judgment, is ball dominant, takes far more threes than his skill would permit and is a turnover machine (which has been the case in multiple games), yes, the defense doesn't justify his PT and he is a detriment, And one can't just excuse the above as "well, just a bad game" because it happened too often already this year and some of the judgment been inexcusable for a 5th year player. Wasn't he the one player most here agreed shouldn't start recently to boost scoring ?

When he plays within his skills, exercises good judgment, etc, then absolutely he justifies his PT and his role. But too often he doesn't. I don't think he was missed all that much on Saturday. We let up 57 points and got roughly his average from Reiber and Oskar on fewer shots than he typically takes.

Caleb's 20% from three, only better than Cliff's 19%. So yeah, that hurts the team. So does his assist/TO ratio. So when you put it all together, it's fair to question whether or not he's a detriment. If he stayed within his skills lane, then no question he'd be a net positive.

Also, no matter how you interpret my post, there's no way it's the worst you've seen unless you have Al on ignore.

 

[MiloTalon13]

I don’t think he was promised more shots by Pike. There’s more to go around with Geo & RHJ having moved on.

Not sure what impact the preseason injury is having on his season. The back issue could be related to the earlier injury. It’s possible he re-aggravated it to the point he couldn’t play against Wisconsin.

"Promised", or told more would be available for him, however you want to put it, Pike can't tell him he can't shoot so much because that was part of the deal in getting him to come back.
Speculation on my part, but like I said, I'd bet it was part of the deal.

 

[Shelby65]

"Promised", or told more would be available for him, however you want to put it, Pike can't tell him he can't shoot so much because that was part of the deal in getting him to come back.
Speculation on my part, but like I said, I'd bet it was part of the deal.

I agree...whether spoken or not, that's part of the deal with player retention these days. I do think Caleb thinks he deserves the green light this year (is his turn).

I label this "selfish", which draws the board's ire. But call it whatever you want, it's definitely happening with Caleb.

 

[goru7]

it's not as simple as is "he a detriment Y/N ?": what I meant is, yes, when he abandons judgment, is ball dominant, takes far more threes than his skill would permit and is a turnover machine (which has been the case in multiple games), yes, the defense doesn't justify his PT and he is a detriment, And one can't just excuse the above as "well, just a bad game" because it happened too often already this year and some of the judgment been inexcusable for a 5th year player. Wasn't he the one player most here agreed shouldn't start recently to boost scoring ?

When he plays within his skills, exercises good judgment, etc, then absolutely he justifies his PT and his role. But too often he doesn't. I don't think he was missed all that much on Saturday. We let up 57 points and got roughly his average from Reiber and Oskar on fewer shots than he typically takes.

Caleb's 20% from three, only better than Cliff's 19%. So yeah, that hurts the team. So does his assist/TO ratio. So when you put it all together, it's fair to question whether or not he's a detriment. If he stayed within his skills lane, then no question he'd be a net positive.

Also, no matter how you interpret my post, there's no way it's the worst you've seen unless you have Al on ignore.

Every year I am amazed by your bad takes but every year I am not suprised there is a worse one than the previous one. Cannot believe how most of the board hasn’t figured you out yet, although a few of the guys have you on ignore , but your lack of basketball knowledge is stunning.

 

[Arizona Knight]

it's not as simple as is "he a detriment Y/N ?": what I meant is, yes, when he abandons judgment, is ball dominant, takes far more threes than his skill would permit and is a turnover machine (which has been the case in multiple games), yes, the defense doesn't justify his PT and he is a detriment, And one can't just excuse the above as "well, just a bad game" because it happened too often already this year and some of the judgment been inexcusable for a 5th year player. Wasn't he the one player most here agreed shouldn't start recently to boost scoring ?

When he plays within his skills, exercises good judgment, etc, then absolutely he justifies his PT and his role. But too often he doesn't. I don't think he was missed all that much on Saturday. We let up 57 points and got roughly his average from Reiber and Oskar on fewer shots than he typically takes.

Caleb's 20% from three, only better than Cliff's 19%. So yeah, that hurts the team. So does his assist/TO ratio. So when you put it all together, it's fair to question whether or not he's a detriment. If he stayed within his skills lane, then no question he'd be a net positive.

Also, no matter how you interpret my post, there's no way it's the worst you've seen unless you have Al on ignore.

This may be the first time I’ve heard a team’s top lock down defender called selfish. A selfish player typically (or pretty much exclusively) is a chucker who plays no defense. So I’ll just walk away from this one.

On to Myles, in what world was he a detriment to the team? UCLA thought he was good enough for a scholarship as a transfer along with just about everywhere else.

 

[RutgersClassof2004]

Every year I am amazed by your bad takes but every year I am not suprised there is a worse one than the previous one. Cannot believe how most of the board hasn’t figured you out yet, although a few of the guys have you on ignore , but your lack of basketball knowledge is stunning.

Lol give me a break.

 

[fluoxetine]

"Promised", or told more would be available for him, however you want to put it, Pike can't tell him he can't shoot so much because that was part of the deal in getting him to come back.
Speculation on my part, but like I said, I'd bet it was part of the deal.

I agree...whether spoken or not, that's part of the deal with player retention these days. I do think Caleb thinks he deserves the green light this year (is his turn).

I label this "selfish", which draws the board's ire. But call it whatever you want, it's definitely happening with Caleb.

This doesn’t make that much sense to me. Where else was Caleb going?

I think it’s more that
(1) like it or not our offense is pretty limited and Paul already doesn’t shoot a lot. If we don’t let Caleb shoot either the opponent only has to focus on at most three guys.
(2) pike is obviously a defense first guy and is willing to put up with a fair amount on offense from the DPOY because he’s the DPOY

 

[Scangg]

Caleb can't play 35 minutes and not shoot

 

[Shelby65]

This may be the first time I’ve heard a team’s top lock down defender called selfish. A selfish player typically (or pretty much exclusively) is a chucker who plays no defense. So I’ll just walk away from this one.

On to Myles, in what world was he a detriment to the team? UCLA thought he was good enough for a scholarship as a transfer along with just about everywhere else.

Offense isn’t defense. One has nothing to do with the other. Isn’t that the view of Hyatt here ?

You are absolutely right about Myles, that is until Cronin relegated him to the end of the bench due to offensive futility by the end of the season. He started in the beginning due to the starter’s injury, then got decent minutes as a backup, then pine after reality set in in Westwood. Look it up. Decent for RU doesn’t mean decent elsewhere.

You obviously didn’t follow his PT his UCLA year

 

[Scangg]

Offense isn’t defense. One has nothing to do with the other.

You are absolutely right about Myles, that is until Cronin relegated him to the end of the bench due by the end of the season. He started in the beginning due to the starter’s injury, then got decent minutes as a backup, then pine after reality set in in Westwood. Look it up. Decent for RU doesn’t mean decent elsewhere.

You obviously didn’t follow his PT his UCLA year

Myles looked overweight at UCLA. I don't think he was overly focused on bball and giving it his all

 

[Shelby65]

Myles looked overweight at UCLA. I don't think he was overly focused on bball and giving it his all

Maybe, but whoever thinks Myles was a good player at UCLA has absolutely no clue. He was flat out bad, and it’s not just me saying that. Benched. Scrub minutes toward the end.

 

[BigEastPhil]

Myles looked overweight at UCLA. I don't think he was overly focused on bball and giving it his all

Just like Myles Dread. Remember Dreads excess baggage from recent game at Rac. Lol.

 

[Shelby65]

This doesn’t make that much sense to me. Where else was Caleb going?

I think it’s more that
(1) like it or not our offense is pretty limited and Paul already doesn’t shoot a lot. If we don’t let Caleb shoot either the opponent only has to focus on at most three guys.
(2) pike is obviously a defense first guy and is willing to put up with a fair amount on offense from the DPOY because he’s the DPOY

Fluxxie…re2) I agree with you that Pike ‘puts up with Caleb’s offense’ for the DPOY reason. But my point continues to be, why should the bad judgment and shot selection exist in the first place ? Why would anyone, especially a 5th year player continue to take so many sh^tty shots beyond his ability ? It’s the crux of my opinion that Caleb feels entitled to ‘get his’ and think he earned the green light based on seniority and DPOY last year

 

[Arizona Knight]

Maybe, but whoever thinks Myles was a good player at UCLA has absolutely no clue. He was flat out bad, and it’s not just me saying that. Benched. Scrub minutes toward the end.

The point that you clearly missed is based on his body of work at Rutgers, where you think he was a detriment, he was offered a scholarship as a transfer to a team that just made a Final Four run earlier in the year.

But you win. Caleb and Myles were anchors for us. If there was an opposite of the ignore feature I would put you on it because I can’t wait to see what you post next.

 

[Shelby65]

The point that you clearly missed is based on his body of work at Rutgers, where you think he was a detriment, he was offered a scholarship as a transfer to a team that just made a Final Four run earlier in the year.

But you win. Caleb and Myles were anchors for us. If there was an opposite of the ignore feature I would put you on it because I can’t wait to see what you post next.

At the time, yes I was glad he left when he did because Cliff was already better on both ends of the court. And I truly think Pike encouraged him to leave rather than relegate him to sub behind Cliff. So yes, Myles would have been a detriment if somehow Pike let him start. As a backup, he’d have been fine. But Pike didn’t want to do that to him

 

[Scangg]

At the time, yes I was glad he left when he did because Cliff was already better on both ends of the court. And I truly think Pike encouraged him to leave rather than relegate him to sub behind Cliff. So yes, Myles would have been a detriment if somehow Pike let him start. As a backup, he’d have been fine. But Pike didn’t want to do that to him

Do you think Dean is better than Myles?

 

[Shelby65]

Do you think Dean is better than Myles?

If I’m picking teams, no. I’d take Myles first. Dean can’t defend any 5 at all. Myles did play D.

But Dean wasn’t a starter. I dont think Pike wanted to demote Myles so encouraged him to ‘go home’ to CA.

What do you disagree with re: my Myles/Reiber/Cliff opinions ?

 

[fluoxetine]

Fluxxie…re2) I agree with you that Pike ‘puts up with Caleb’s offense’ for the DPOY reason. But my point continues to be, why should the bad judgment and shot selection exist in the first place ? Why would anyone, especially a 5th year player continue to take so many sh^tty shots beyond his ability ? It’s the crux of my opinion that Caleb feels entitled to ‘get his’ and think he earned the green light based on seniority and DPOY last year

My belief is that Pike does not think Caleb’s shot selection is that bad, in general. I certainly don’t think it is the case the Pikiell has told him not to take threes and Caleb has just ignored it. He clearly has the green light to shoot them (as have other players that we’re not shooting them at a high percentage, i.e Hyatt and Mag.. they seem to be (or were before injury) improving)

Why is this? Most likely it goes back to point #1.. you need people to shoot. Even being an inefficient threat can be better than being no threat at all; at the very least it forces people to cover you

 

[Shelby65]

Fair points…your verbiage ‘puts up with’ suggested he doesn’t agree with it but tolerates for other reasons, which I guess is not what you meant ?

I also understand your point that if you don’t shoot the defense won’t guard you. I disagree with the premise. 1) the defense prefers that the poor shooters shoot. Why defend ? Double someone else and have another rebounder No brainer. No need to ‘keep the defense honest’ if Caleb’s shooting. Not everyone has talent to shoot 3s. Better for a D to let those players shoot than defend very low percentage shots

 

[Scangg]

If I’m picking teams, no. I’d take Myles first. Dean can’t defend any 5 at all. Myles did play D.

But Dean wasn’t a starter. I dont think Pike wanted to demote Myles so encouraged him to ‘go home’ to CA.

What do you disagree with re: my Myles/Reiber/Cliff opinions ?

Myles isn't like other players where basketball isn't his #1 interest. If he could come off the bench at UCLA he could at Rutgers too

 

[fluoxetine]

Fair points…your verbiage ‘puts up with’ suggested he doesn’t agree with it but tolerates for other reasons, which I guess is not what you meant ?

"Puts up with" sort of serves a double meaning here.

It's without a doubt a fact that Caleb has put up some bad shots that the coaching staff would certainly have preferred he not take. This is why I said that I don't think the coaching staff thinks his shot selection is bad "in general". Sometimes it's definitely bad. Other times it's debatably bad. Should he have the green light to take open threes? I think you can make the argument the answer is no. But at the same time I think it's clear that he does, in reality, have the green light to take those shots from the coaching staff.

The second meaning is just that obviously Caleb is not a particularly efficient offensive player even when he makes good decisions. The coaching staff obviously "puts up" with this fact because of his defense.

I also understand your point that if you don’t shoot the defense won’t guard you. I disagree with the premise. 1) the defense prefers that the poor shooters shoot. Why defend ? Double someone else and have another rebounder No brainer. No need to ‘keep the defense honest’ if Caleb’s shooting. Not everyone has talent to shoot 3s. Better for a D to let those players shoot than defend very low percentage shots

If you're bad enough, sure this is obviously true. But for the most part it doesn't seem like defenses are that happy to just let Caleb shoot it. They still guard him.

Also, when you are a team like us that (1) barely scores a point per possession and (2) gets a lot of offensive rebounds.. you don't need to be a very good 3-point shooter for that to be an average shot for our offense. Obviously 20% isn't cutting it. I would guess that most people believe that Caleb is not actually quite as bad as 20% from three in the long run.

People hate me for saying this but even an entire college career of three point attempts (especially for non high-volume shooters) is still a small sample size. Caleb is 70/263 (26.6%). The 95% confidence interval on that is 21.4% to 32.4%. Based on other factors (Pike gives him the green light, defenses mostly still guard him, he's not a terrible FT shooter) I would guess is true percentage is at least pushing 30%. That's still not good. But on a limited offensive team like ours it might be good enough to still let him shoot sometimes.

 

[Shelby65]

Myles isn't like other players where basketball isn't his #1 interest. If he could come off the bench at UCLA he could at Rutgers too

We don’t know him. Transferring to bench status at a higher level program isn’t the same thing as getting demoted at Rutgers. I believe firmly that he had a convo with Pike. Best for RU and for Myles to leave. Win win.

 

[Shelby65]

"Puts up with" sort of serves a double meaning here.

It's without a doubt a fact that Caleb has put up some bad shots that the coaching staff would certainly have preferred he not take. This is why I said that I don't think the coaching staff thinks his shot selection is bad "in general". Sometimes it's definitely bad. Other times it's debatably bad. Should he have the green light to take open threes? I think you can make the argument the answer is no. But at the same time I think it's clear that he does, in reality, have the green light to take those shots from the coaching staff.

The second meaning is just that obviously Caleb is not a particularly efficient offensive player even when he makes good decisions. The coaching staff obviously "puts up" with this fact because of his defense.

If you're bad enough, sure this is obviously true. But for the most part it doesn't seem like defenses are that happy to just let Caleb shoot it. They still guard him.

Also, when you are a team like us that (1) barely scores a point per possession and (2) gets a lot of offensive rebounds.. you don't need to be a very good 3-point shooter for that to be an average shot for our offense. Obviously 20% isn't cutting it. I would guess that most people believe that Caleb is not actually quite as bad as 20% from three in the long run.

People hate me for saying this but even an entire college career of three point attempts (especially for non high-volume shooters) is still a small sample size. Caleb is 70/263 (26.6%). The 95% confidence interval on that is 21.4% to 32.4%. Based on other factors (Pike gives him the green light, defenses mostly still guard him, he's not a terrible FT shooter) I would guess is true percentage is at least pushing 30%. That's still not good. But on a limited offensive team like ours it might be good enough to still let him shoot sometimes.

I agree with your second meaning of ‘puts up with’.

You sure about that ci ? What about other variables (age, opponents, home/away, etc). I don’t think you can calculate 3 pt ci for a player

 

[FinalFourOrBust_rivals142702]

Myles made the best move for him but Rutgers would have been a better team with him last year. It’s not crazy to say we beat ND in the tourney last year if Myles was on the team. Atkinson ate up cliff all game long.

 

[Shelby65]

Yes better if Myles were the backup. I don’t deny that. But I believe Myles didn’t want the likely demotion so he transferred.

 

[RutgersClassof2004]

Myles made the best move for him but Rutgers would have been a better team with him last year. It’s not crazy to say we beat ND in the tourney last year if Myles was on the team. Atkinson ate up cliff all game long.

Silly to even discuss. Myles wanted that UCLA name on his resume. It was also no-brainer he'd be backing up Cliff.

 

[RutgersClassof2004]

Yes better if Myles were the backup. I don’t deny that. But I believe Myles didn’t want the likely demotion so he transferred.

Shelby right again.

 

[fluoxetine]

I agree with your second meaning of ‘puts up with’.

You sure about that ci ? What about other variables (age, opponents, home/away, etc). I don’t think you can calculate 3 pt ci for a player

The confidence interval is just assuming every attempt is a binomial trial and they all have the same probability. It's not adjusting for different conditions or anything. Obviously quite imperfect but the idea is correct.