Nick Rutherford

  • 120 replies
  • 16492 views

goredmen

  • *****
  • 5066
Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #20 on: June 19, 2019, 10:11:55 AM »
There is nothing in this kid’s collegiate history that suggests he is a pure PG.

He literally was the definition of true PG in his two years at FAU. He wasn't playing PG at Monmouth because they want Salnave at that position.

He was top 100 in D1 in assist rate both seasons at FAU, top 50 in his Soph season. Rutherford was a true PG there by every definition of it.

Not saying he's a great get but I also don't expect him to play 30 mpg. He's far from a game changer but he's definitely a PG, to say otherwise is ludicrous

Marillac

  • *****
  • 11224
Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #21 on: June 19, 2019, 10:42:33 AM »
He literally was the definition of true PG in his two years at FAU. He wasn't playing PG at Monmouth because they want Salnave at that position.

He was top 100 in D1 in assist rate both seasons at FAU, top 50 in his Soph season. Rutherford was a true PG there by every definition of it.

Not saying he's a great get but I also don't expect him to play 30 mpg. He's far from a game changer but he's definitely a PG, to say otherwise is ludicrous

Salnave is a combo guard and not a point guard—he’s a scorer. He was also a soph. It doesn’t bother you that he sat behind a soph combo guard at Monmouth as a fourth-year junior? Why couldn’t they play together? They are both 6’3.

When you lose 20-25 games stats mean much less. It’s easy to get assists when you are getting massacred and the opposition stops playing tough defense. Hell, you can pickup 3 in the last 90 seconds against the walkons.

We need to look at what he did last year. Was he hurt or is he just not that good? Anything you guys think he did at FAU is undone by the disgusting season he had for a 14-21 Monmouth team.

One good assist : to rate in three years doesn’t warrant the label of PG for a kid that isn’t able to score (less chances at turnovers) and who does it against a -1.98 SOS for a 10-20 team that lost by between 13-29 pts a dozen times.

I hope he was a injured. I’d be willing to buy into that explanation.

Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #22 on: June 19, 2019, 10:46:14 AM »
His soph stats are much better, but that came on a 10-20 FAU team. The year prior FAU was 8-25 and last year Monmouth was 14-21. Anything he did as a soph was negated by what he did as a fourth-year junior (after sitting out a year). He should have been a 15 and 6 player at that level.

Hitting game winning shots are positives, but they don’t compare to consistent performance.

This is a mixed bag here. I’m relieved two have two point guards because we had by far the worst PG situation in the conference two days ago. Also, in the words of Sandy Alderson, “there is no such thing as a bad one year contract.”

At the same time, St. John’s has to be able to land better grad transfers in positions of need.

Glad to have you back!

I agree with pretty much all of it. I’m just not as worried as you re future recruiting based on this summers results. 3 of the kids filled immediate needs and Champaigne I’m willing to take a chance on Anderson finding and developing a local kid.  Of course getting a stud would have been great. I think we’ll get our share.
*wipes ketchup from his eyes* - I guess Heinz sight isn’t 20/20.

goredmen

  • *****
  • 5066
Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #23 on: June 19, 2019, 10:54:37 AM »
Salnave is a combo guard and not a point guard—he’s a scorer. He was also a soph. It doesn’t bother you that he sat behind a soph combo guard at Monmouth as a fourth-year junior? Why couldn’t they play together? They are both 6’3.

When you lose 20-25 games stats mean much less. It’s easy to get assists when you are getting massacred and the opposition stops playing tough defense. Hell, you can pickup 3 in the last 90 seconds against the walkons.

We need to look at what he did last year. Was he hurt or is he just not that good? Anything you guys think he did at FAU is undone by the disgusting season he had for a 14-21 Monmouth team.

One good assist : to rate in three years doesn’t warrant the label of PG for a kid that isn’t able to score (less chances at turnovers) and who does it against a -1.98 SOS for a 10-20 team that lost by between 13-29 pts a dozen times.

I hope he was a injured. I’d be willing to buy into that explanation.

You're confusing me saying this kid is a great player (never said) with this kid is a PG. It is definitely concerning that he wasn't more than a role player at Monmouth and there are certainly other concerns regarding how good he is. But he is a PG. He's not a 2, he's not a combo. He is a PG. Regardless of what you think of this staff's ability to lure in big time talent, they are smart enough to know what a PG is and wouldn't have bought in another SG or combo with Heron, Wright and Williams already on the roster.

TONYD3

  • *****
  • 5578
Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #24 on: June 19, 2019, 11:38:17 AM »
Your basketball IQ is nonexistent if you think the problem with Dixon was athletic ability. He was literally our quickest player—and by quite a large margin. Dixon didn’t have it between the ears and that showed up consistently on defense and limited some of his offensive skill.

He’s also basically the same size as this kid and both are combo guards. There is nothing in this kid’s collegiate history that suggests he is a pure PG.
I have no idea what this kid is able to do. Neither do you. You are right I used the wrong word in athletic ability. He wasn’t skilled enough at his size to score here and play defense here against bigger guards. I also agree that he wasn’t a smart defender. All of that should have been considered before he was given a scholarship.
I think the worst case is we have a Geno Lawrence talent at 6’3 who competes and plays defense. That kind of guy can play backup minutes. He is also being recruited to play in this system. He doesn’t have to be the best player.

Mikey Dixon who could beat him one on one 100 times out of 100, can’t play here at all. Because like you said he wasn’t able to handle mullin’s complex man to man defense.
We have 2 elite players. Everyone else just has to play their roles and compete.

Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #25 on: June 19, 2019, 12:22:09 PM »
Perhaps he'll have a GENESIS upon his arrival.

Welcome to St. Johns Nick Rutherford!

Marillac

  • *****
  • 11224
Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #26 on: June 19, 2019, 01:00:24 PM »
You're confusing me saying this kid is a great player (never said) with this kid is a PG. It is definitely concerning that he wasn't more than a role player at Monmouth and there are certainly other concerns regarding how good he is. But he is a PG. He's not a 2, he's not a combo. He is a PG. Regardless of what you think of this staff's ability to lure in big time talent, they are smart enough to know what a PG is and wouldn't have bought in another SG or combo with Heron, Wright and Williams already on the roster.

I don’t think I am conflating the two points. I don’t see anything this kid has done warranting the label of PG. He had one decent assist:TO ratio in three years and that was in a lesser conference for a bad team.

He seems like a combo that can’t score.

Phil Greene averaged 3.0 assists to 1.8 turnovers as a true freshman and had 2:1 ratio as a soph (with more scoring than Rutherford) on a mich higher level and nobody would label him anything close to a PG. It’s not like we landed some pure, dump-it-off PG like some are alluding to.

Ez_Uzi

  • **
  • 172
Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #27 on: June 19, 2019, 01:21:04 PM »
In all of the PG conversations, I have not heard any mention of the potential for Wright to assume some PG role. Casual looks says his handle is better than Williams.

goredmen

  • *****
  • 5066
Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #28 on: June 19, 2019, 01:24:23 PM »
It’s not like we landed some pure, dump-it-off PG like some are alluding to.

Except that we did. Again, in his two seasons at FAU he was top 100 in assist rate both seasons and top 50 in his Soph season. Combos don't do that. He may not be great or even good, but he's a pass first PG that turns the ball over a little too often.

Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #29 on: June 19, 2019, 01:27:01 PM »
I don’t think I am conflating the two points. I don’t see anything this kid has done warranting the label of PG. He had one decent assist:TO ratio in three years and that was in a lesser conference for a bad team.

He seems like a combo that can’t score.

Phil Greene averaged 3.0 assists to 1.8 turnovers as a true freshman and had 2:1 ratio as a soph (with more scoring than Rutherford) on a mich higher level and nobody would label him anything close to a PG. It’s not like we landed some pure, dump-it-off PG like some are alluding to.
Have you watched any of his tape or are you just basing this on his mediocre stats?  He is most definitely a traditional ball in hand "dump it off" pg.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycj5FgT3cuA

I'll agree that this is not the type of player I hoped would be our starting pg this season.  His numbers weren't impressive at a level much lower then the big east so there's little to suggest he'll be a bonified lead man for our offense next season.  I wasn't as bullish as many were on Mikey Dixon because of the increase in competition and this is a completely different situation considering rutherford didn't even produce at the lower level. 

The only positive is that I'm happy they're filling holes using the grad transfer route.  Bring a kid in for a year and then re-open the scholarship so you can bring in a higher level hs player the following year.  I'd much rather have a kid like Rutherford only using a scholarship for a year then bring in a guy like Justice Hill who would eat up a scholarship for 4 years.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2019, 01:42:53 PM by colelatshaw2010 »

QuanMan

  • *****
  • 1744
Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #30 on: June 19, 2019, 01:43:38 PM »
How in the world do you get that from his stats? He averaged 2.3 assist to 2.0 turnovers in a subpar conference.

This is nothing but duct tape over a gaping hole.


Considering that most grad transfers have already committed and that we want to stash open slots for 20' and 21', Rutherford brings experience, good size and helps the team's overall role definition. Minutes can be distributed evenly now and our underclassmen can be molded better.


Between Rutherford, Champagne, Sears, McGriff and a hopeful big man this staff has done a great job complimenting our core given the time constraints and limited pool to recruit from.
Section 3
Section 116

Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #31 on: June 19, 2019, 01:47:17 PM »
OMG!  Why wasn't Anderson able to convince Cole Anthony or Scottie Lewis to de-commit and sign with SJU! He sucks! With the plethora of 4 and 5 star players still unsigned at the last minute is this all we get? He sucks!  I was expecting a final four team this year even after the bad publicity from the erratic coaching search! He sucks. After two months I was also expecting Anderson to upgrade all of the facilities on campus including Carnesecca Arena. He sucks!  No, maybe you all should read your posts and jump into reality.

Marillac

  • *****
  • 11224
Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #32 on: June 19, 2019, 02:30:39 PM »
OMG!  Why wasn't Anderson able to convince Cole Anthony or Scottie Lewis to de-commit and sign with SJU! He sucks! With the plethora of 4 and 5 star players still unsigned at the last minute is this all we get? He sucks!  I was expecting a final four team this year even after the bad publicity from the erratic coaching search! He sucks. After two months I was also expecting Anderson to upgrade all of the facilities on campus including Carnesecca Arena. He sucks!  No, maybe you all should read your posts and jump into reality.

I have some extra hay if you want to keep building nonsensical strawman to beat the sh*t out of.


Johnny23

  • *****
  • 3277
Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #33 on: June 19, 2019, 03:27:29 PM »
In all of the PG conversations, I have not heard any mention of the potential for Wright to assume some PG role. Casual looks says his handle is better than Williams.

That's because he's not even close to being a PG. He's another undersized, minimal production wing which was Mullin's forte. We don't need anymore Justin Simon's bringing the ball up the court, that was horrific to watch and Simon was ten times more athletic and better than Wright is. That's why the current regime is cleaning up the mess left by the former staff and actually filling spots with players who fit their real roles like point guards who can handle/distribute the ball and forwards who can crash the glass and score down low.

sju89tr

  • *****
  • 2499
Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #34 on: June 19, 2019, 03:46:24 PM »
I don't know what the fuss is to debate this. He is a one year guy to eat some minutes, who cares. Kind of like adding Ron Mvoulka. He played some minutes and helped out. Rather have Rutherford rather than a 2 star 4 year kid.   

redslope

  • *****
  • 1823
Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #35 on: June 19, 2019, 04:00:34 PM »
True fans do not insult the lads who go out and play for our Redmen.  I root for the team's success even if they don't have the players I might want to see.  If you don't like the team, go root for someone else. 

As to Nick, it has been noted that he did not play for great teams in great leagues which is obvious BUT did you ever think that his assist stats were a factor of those team ability to shoot?????  both FMU and Monmouth shot 5% lower than SJU.  Heck our Redmen averaged a dozen more points per game. His rebounding were mostly defensive (not cleaning up on missed shots) and his defensive rebounds per minute were better than virtually everyone on our Redmen.  He is here for ONE year and will not be in the way of our 2020 recruiting.

He is no comparison to Ponds but there is no PG comparison to him (yet) in Redmen history.

Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #36 on: June 19, 2019, 04:01:13 PM »
That's because he's not even close to being a PG. He's another undersized, minimal production wing which was Mullin's forte. We don't need anymore Justin Simon's bringing the ball up the court, that was horrific to watch and Simon was ten times more athletic and better than Wright is. That's why the current regime is cleaning up the mess left by the former staff and actually filling spots with players who fit their real roles like point guards who can handle/distribute the ball and forwards who can crash the glass and score down low.

How do you figure he is undersized for the wing?
*wipes ketchup from his eyes* - I guess Heinz sight isn’t 20/20.

Marillac

  • *****
  • 11224
Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #37 on: June 19, 2019, 04:02:44 PM »
I don't know what the fuss is to debate this. He is a one year guy to eat some minutes, who cares. Kind of like adding Ron Mvoulka. He played some minutes and helped out. Rather have Rutherford rather than a 2 star 4 year kid.   

It’s not a fuss it’s a legitimate concern. We made the tournament last year. We return the best duo in the conference—a power conference.

We were clearly one decent PG away from a near certain NCAA berth with a coach who has never had a losing season. Oh, and the PG we lost was a 2x All-American and our other guard was the Big East Defensive Player of the Year. We should have had PGs lining up to take the reins from Ponds.

Most of these grad transfers decided to transfer around the same time or after Anderson was hired so there is no valid excuse. This is a bad sign.

It sure seems like Anderson thinks he can recruit lesser players that fit his system.

Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #38 on: June 19, 2019, 04:03:48 PM »
I don't know what the fuss is to debate this. He is a one year guy to eat some minutes, who cares. Kind of like adding Ron Mvoulka. He played some minutes and helped out. Rather have Rutherford rather than a 2 star 4 year kid.   

Glad we got two natural PGs this offseason given that Anderson inherited a roster without one, but a sub-200 ranked 5'9 freshman PG and a grad transfer with unspectacular numbers at Monmouth is probably not good enough for this team to realistically contend for a tourney bid.

So the fuss - best I can tell - is about diminished prospects of making the dance this year despite retaining Heron and LJ.  If the staff added a guy like Thornton, we may have had a roster capable of being coached up to a level at which we could actually be good.  A missed opportunity.

goredmen

  • *****
  • 5066
Re: Nick Rutherford
« Reply #39 on: June 19, 2019, 04:33:26 PM »
Most of these grad transfers decided to transfer around the same time or after Anderson was hired so there is no valid excuse. This is a bad sign.

Aside from Thornton which grad transfer PGs would you have liked?