Going into the Columbia men’s basketball season, expectations were high. The Lions were returning all five starters and every significant contributor from a squad that went 16-12 (7-7 Ivy). So, why have the Lions sauntered out of the gate in the non-conference schedule and now the Ivy campaign? One word: consistency.
Coach Joe Jones preached that the club needed to be more consistent before the season started, and after Columbia’s 72-54 loss against Cornell on Saturday, Jones reiterated his statement.
“We need to get consistent. We’ve got a guy who’s able to score 16 one night, and then none the next,” he said. “So, we have to play consistent basketball. If we can get some guys to play consistently, that’s the key.”
Jones continues to stress the importance of consistency, but why haven’t the Lions figured it out already? How can a team contend against probable NCAA tournament teams—Ohio State and Villanova—on the road, and get routed by Albany (a 32-point loss), Sacred Heart (a 16-point loss), and most recently Cornell? The main problems have been the inconsistency in the Lions’ perimeter shooting, a lack of a secondary scorer, and injuries—which have forced the team to shift its rotation.
The Lions are shooting 39.8 percent overall, 33.5 percent from three-point range. Compare that to last season, when Columbia shot 45.9 percent overall and 40.2 percent from three-point range, which ranked near the top of the nation. This reliance on three-point shooting allowed the Lions to be successful last season. On the contrary, since Columbia has shot an average percentage from three-point range, the reliance (an extremely high 46.4 percent of Columbia’s shots are threes) on the long ball this year has hurt the Lions thus far. The only explanations behind a drop-off that big from their last campaign is that the Lions are getting unlucky with roles, last season’s numbers were an aberration (or this year’s are), or their perimeter shooting is erratic.
In Columbia’s seven wins this season, the Lions are shooting a solid 45.8 percent from the field and 43.5 percent from three-point range, while averaging 74.6 points per contest. In its 10 losses, Columbia is shooting 35.5 percent from the field and a pedestrian 26.4 percent from the three-point range, while taking a very similar percentage of three-pointers in proportion to overall shots (46.3 percent in wins; 46.5 percent in losses). The main difference between the Lions’ wins and losses is the drop-off in percentage of made three-pointers, which has plagued Columbia.
Further, the lack of a reliable secondary scorer in addition to senior John Baumann has hurt the Lions. Baumann has scored in double figures in 13 of Columbia’s 17 contests, while averaging 14.5 points and 6.5 rebounds per contest, shooting 49.4 percent from the field, and hitting 75.3 percent of his free throws. However, the emergence of a scorer to complement Baumann has been inconsistent throughout the season.
In the Lions’ seven wins, another scorer in addition to Baumann has helped lead the Lions to victory. However, in Columbia’s losses, the opposite has occurred. Furthermore, when it appears as though the Lions have a quality second option emerging, inconsistency or injuries has plagued them.
First, it was Pat Foley who clearly looked to be that necessary secondary scorer. Foley averaged nine points and four assists before going down with a shoulder injury in the fourth game of the year. A number of Lions, including Ben Nwachukwu, Joe Bova, Niko Scott, Mack Montgomery, KJ Matsui and Brett Loscalzo, have all appeared to emerge as quality scorers at some point in this season. However, as much talent as those players exhibited in particular games, the fact that Columbia cannot get those performances on a consistent basis has hurt the team. Nobody knows which player is going to step up at any given point, which has been a huge factor in the Lions 7-10 (0-2) record thus far.
The only consistent facet of the Lions’ game this season has been its inconsistency. In order to right the ship and contend, the Lions must approach every game like it’s their final game—and show the same sort of aggression and passion they exhibited against Ohio State and Villanova. Columbia still has time, and it must seize the moment in order to avoid having a disappointing season.