|
All Mac
Mar 12, 2019 20:55:10 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by 00hmh on Mar 12, 2019 20:55:10 GMT -6
We were missing shots that were not contested outside, had to stop shooting them and go inside for fiercely contested harder inside shots... Gee they must not have been too fiercely contested because we ranked 63rd in two point field goal percentage. You are so lost... Wait a minute. You didn't notice shooting declined? When we stopped hitting outside and they packed in our shooting did not decline on easier shots? Your stat is bogus...you are misusing season statistics. Consider all season 3pfg% 32 games, .326, not good. True. But. In 18 games in conference .279. That means a lot better before in those 14 games... 2pfg% declined too, check that out. Less severely but significant. In conference a different team (both literally, due to injury, and in performance). As I correctly said, earlier in the season we shot better outside and people defended us differently.
|
|
|
All Mac
Mar 12, 2019 20:59:37 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by 00hmh on Mar 12, 2019 20:59:37 GMT -6
Yes. But when we expected a much better team, we did not expect a great rebounding team. We did expect better than terrible shooting. Where did we fall most short?...Turnovers extra, disappointing as they were, did not have the same impact. Rebounds lost extra not that much.
We had enough possessions despite those things. More or less normal shooting would have produced maybe 12-6 instead of 6-12. EVEN with BOTH the TO and rebounding issues. So, what point is it you’re trying to make and more importantly does anyone give a shit? If your contention is our lousy 3 pt shooting was the worst of all, ok fine by me. I’d contend that the turnovers and their timing was even worse... How worse? Numbers don't back that up. Missing shots down the stretch unable to score sure felt worse, too.
|
|
|
Post by lmills72 on Mar 12, 2019 21:38:51 GMT -6
I'm glad to see everyone has now agreed that the offense sucks and now we're just trying to figure out which part of it sucks the most.
Good job men. Carry on.
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Mar 13, 2019 3:02:56 GMT -6
Back to rationalizing everything, which will not change the record nor will it cause most to think any differently about this season or the coach. No credit given for “almost” and no excuses. It’s win the tourney or bust at this point. The regular season was a fail.
|
|
|
Post by realitycheck on Mar 13, 2019 5:37:39 GMT -6
So, what point is it you’re trying to make and more importantly does anyone give a shit? If your contention is our lousy 3 pt shooting was the worst of all, ok fine by me. I’d contend that the turnovers and their timing was even worse... How worse? Numbers don't back that up. Missing shots down the stretch unable to score sure felt worse, too. Again, what the hell is your point in all this distract and deflect drivel? ALL of these stats are damning. Bad shooting, check. Teams adjusted and we didn’t. High rate of turnovers, check. Helter skelter pace and poor decisions. Out rebounded and second chances for opponents, check. I’d contend the turnovers and offensive rebounds we give up are far worse. Poor shooting can be directly affected by both. You work 25 seconds of the shot clock and get a stop only to give up an offensive rebound. Get another stop and then rush down and turn it over. Now we feel a heightened sense of urgency and start chucking bad looks early in the shot clock and it compounds. You do this 15-20 times and your shooting suffers as you’re confidence wanes. Cause and effect. They all equate to two common themes, lousy coaching and lack of mental toughness. I can’t really tell if you’re somehow trying to justify our ineptitude or just blathering as usual but I now feel I’ve fed the crazy troll one to many times.
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Mar 13, 2019 6:00:30 GMT -6
Gee they must not have been too fiercely contested because we ranked 63rd in two point field goal percentage. You are so lost... Wait a minute. You didn't notice shooting declined? When we stopped hitting outside and they packed in our shooting did not decline on easier shots? Your stat is bogus...you are misusing season statistics. Consider all season 3pfg% 32 games, .326, not good. True. But. In 18 games in conference .279. That means a lot better before in those 14 games... 2pfg% declined too, check that out. Less severely but significant. In conference a different team (both literally, due to injury, and in performance). As I correctly said, earlier in the season we shot better outside and people defended us differently. Blah......Blah.....Blah............ Our conference 2pt % is 50.8 ( 3rd place in the Mac), last season it was 51.2, so I don't see the huge decline you seem to believe exists. Hell we didn't bring in any shooters or bigs so it looks to me like bad recruiting and not "fierce defense" was our real problem.
|
|
|
All Mac
Mar 13, 2019 9:37:37 GMT -6
Post by 00hmh on Mar 13, 2019 9:37:37 GMT -6
Wait a minute. You didn't notice shooting declined? When we stopped hitting outside and they packed in our shooting did not decline on easier shots? Our conference 2pt % is 50.8 ( 3rd place in the Mac), last season it was 51.2, so I don't see the huge decline you seem to believe exists. The decline was mostly in 3pfg%. That is true. The opponents could afford to defend the best part of our game, in the lane, and hold down our efficiency. They could give us easy 3's and we could not punish them. Turnovers would have been reduced as there would be more room in the lane for inside passing and the inside players would not have been smothered and harassed as much.
Mostly, we had to take the easy shots outside, yet could not hit them. It was a disaster. Had we hit a relatively modest 3pfg%, equal to that we were hitting earlier they would have had to extend more and guard us outside, and as a result our inside game would have been significantly better. That would along with the increase in number of 3 pfg.
I have no idea here why you are arguing this. We got good shots in most conference games. Most of those losses would have been W's with very modest improvement in shooting.
|
|
|
Post by redfeather on Mar 13, 2019 13:57:36 GMT -6
Doesn't it seem like we've had an odd string of players who go from good three point shooting to bad three point shooting later in their careers? I'm thinking of Scaife, Jeremiah Davis, Kiapway, Persons. And didn't Seller's 3pt% go down significantly his junior year just like Mallers did this year?
|
|
|
All Mac
Mar 13, 2019 14:04:47 GMT -6
Post by redfeather on Mar 13, 2019 14:04:47 GMT -6
You've got to include turnovers here also. A turnover is a lost possession and a lost possession is potential lost points. You combine that with poor shooting percentages and you typically end up losing, which we did. It still blows me away at how our turnovers "went up" as the season progressed? That is nothing other than piss poor coaching to me. That's included. I agree. But.
First off, giving up a possession occurs more often by missing shots than by turnovers. And.
Which would be easier going from 20 turnovers down to 10, to gain 10 points, or making 5 extra 2pfga? Or 3 more 3pfga? VERY hard to get much below 12-15 TO.
I do know we really sucked shooting the ball when they could pack inside and ignore our 3 pt game. We were missing shots that were not contested outside, had to stop shooting them and go inside for fiercely contested harder inside shots...
Yes you did include turnovers in your original post and I'm not disagreeing with your point. However if you cut our turnovers in half, or just average 10 let's say, and we keep our same scoring percentage the same as it is now then what does that look like at the end of the numerous close losses we had over the course of the conference season? Without doing the actual math I'm guessing we would have won a lot more conference games this year.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
All Mac
Mar 13, 2019 14:14:01 GMT -6
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2019 14:14:01 GMT -6
Doesn't it seem like we've had an odd string of players who go from good three point shooting to bad three point shooting later in their careers? I'm thinking of Scaife, Jeremiah Davis, Kiapway, Persons. And didn't Seller's 3pt% go down significantly his junior year just like Mallers did this year? .388 .415 .373 Not so on Sellers. Interesting point on others.
|
|
|
All Mac
Mar 13, 2019 16:46:14 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by 00hmh on Mar 13, 2019 16:46:14 GMT -6
That's included. I agree. But.
First off, giving up a possession occurs more often by missing shots than by turnovers. And.
Which would be easier going from 20 turnovers down to 10, to gain 10 points, or making 5 extra 2pfga? Or 3 more 3pfga? VERY hard to get much below 12-15 TO.
I do know we really sucked shooting the ball when they could pack inside and ignore our 3 pt game. We were missing shots that were not contested outside, had to stop shooting them and go inside for fiercely contested harder inside shots...
Yes you did include turnovers in your original post and I'm not disagreeing with your point. However if you cut our turnovers in half, or just average 10 let's say, and we keep our same scoring percentage the same as it is now then what does that look like at the end of the numerous close losses we had over the course of the conference season? Without doing the actual math I'm guessing we would have won a lot more conference games this year. 10 turnovers very good, hard to reach. First step? In this case the packed in defense caused lots of the turnovers. Shooting better, unclogging the lane would have improved TO stat. So that shooting thing doubly important.
|
|
|
All Mac
Mar 13, 2019 16:59:34 GMT -6
Post by sweep on Mar 13, 2019 16:59:34 GMT -6
Yes you did include turnovers in your original post and I'm not disagreeing with your point. However if you cut our turnovers in half, or just average 10 let's say, and we keep our same scoring percentage the same as it is now then what does that look like at the end of the numerous close losses we had over the course of the conference season? Without doing the actual math I'm guessing we would have won a lot more conference games this year. 10 turnovers very good, hard to reach. First step? In this case the packed in defense caused lots of the turnovers. Shooting better, unclogging the lane would have improved TO stat. So that shooting thing doubly important. The fact is 12-13 is about average, and we aren't anywhere close to that. You are such a doofus. I love how you are trying to frame an argument our shooting deficiencies are some sort of statistical aberration and not the direct result of poor coaching and bad recruiting. What exactly is your point ?
|
|
|
All Mac
Mar 13, 2019 18:11:27 GMT -6
Post by proctorp on Mar 13, 2019 18:11:27 GMT -6
OOhmh, please explain why BSU should keep such a mediocre coach? Your statistical defense of this team is a joke.
|
|
|
All Mac
Mar 14, 2019 10:48:50 GMT -6
Post by bsu0 on Mar 14, 2019 10:48:50 GMT -6
He is a cheerleader. Atta boy!! Good shot! And as Earl would say, ''Blah Blah Blah.''
|
|