|
Post by 00hmh on Apr 16, 2020 11:00:58 GMT -6
High school stats. Doesn’t always translate. I hope it does. I also hope we don’t just park him 23 feet from the bucket and tell him to bomb away and he does nothing else. There's a difference in having the ability to knock them down and the ability to do it in game speed, against good defenders consistently under pressure. Yes, Bumbalough is a shooter but after him, who besides Gunn is a proven outside threat? BTW, Bumb shot .335%, Coleman .325 and Thomas .318. Hazen shot .303 and Acree just .218 (9-42!). Yeah, it's different being a high volume shooter.
I agree with you about Bumbalough who I think will get better if he is looking for his shot more.
Agree, too also, very skeptical Acree can be a high volume outside shooter. True, he was 2 for 5 in the last 5 conference games. But that was when he was getting more minutes and actually cutting down on 3pfga on a per minute basis. Indicates to me he was taking shots in the flow of the offense better, fewer and better shots than in the games earlier. He had a horrible game when he played minutes against Portland 0-6 which may make his poor season stats a little off...but it is also clear he was a better player late in the year. He has to be and can be a player who hits enough shots so he can make people guard him outside then take it to the basket.
Hazen may get better shots next year if he is usually guarded by an opposing big guy, and our offense has the big going outside more than Teague, we really didn't want him shooting the 3.
Thomas and Coleman are just good enough to supplement a couple of primary outside threats. Coleman seems likely to have the ball and not be wide open outside. Thomas looked better late in the year.
|
|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on Apr 16, 2020 11:58:21 GMT -6
I will largely agree but will state that late in the season Thomas had a fine looking stroke... I also liked the way thomas's shot looked but until we see more we do not know
|
|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on Apr 16, 2020 12:10:39 GMT -6
Bumbalough led us in threes shot.. How many more do we want him to shot.. In a perfect world if he could get to 40% that would be great. I seem to remember him being almost better in transition than spotting up.. He Seemed to hit every three from the right wing when he took in transition
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Apr 16, 2020 12:26:43 GMT -6
Bumbalough led us in threes shot.. How many more do we want him to shot.. In a perfect world if he could get to 40% that would be great. I seem to remember him being almost better in transition than spotting up.. He Seemed to hit every three from the right wing when he took in transition I think too many of those shots were not in the offense and not what he was looking for but what he had to take. I don't want him taking more shots, but more shots he is looking for. And it may be we have to actually run the offense to get him shots.
The shots in transition should be more of our offense. It's a possibility we run more. If we have everybody, especially our most athletic players, ready to play we can push the pace a bit. Bumbalough would benefit despite not being the first guy down floor always.
|
|
|
Post by lmills72 on Apr 16, 2020 13:00:17 GMT -6
I think about the only thing guaranteed is that we're going to shoot 3s. We were in the top 30 in the nation last year in 3-point attempts and we've probably been in the top 50, probably no lower than top 100, for the past five years. We're going to put them up.
Gunn is our best returning 3-point shooter percentage wise but, last we saw him play, he had little else to offer. We can only hope he brings some different elements of the game to the court when he gets back on it next year, or either his court time will be limited or he'll give up so many points in other areas that it likely just won't be beneficial to have him on the court.
Bumbalough, I believe, can be much better from the 3 but we really don't know. Shot a respectable big-man percentage, but not good for one of your top shooters. Had very few games where he shot really well and in 12 games shot worse than 20%. That can't happen for a guy who put up 167 3s last year. OTOH a lot of folks on these boards were predicting a reduced role for Bum next year Walton back. If that's the case, that's another hit to our 3 shooting.
Based on the way we play and what our roster currently looks like we're likely going to play 2 of these 4 a lot: Hazen, Thomas, Gunn, Jones. Depending on which two, you should be OK with those guys taking a few 3s but no volume shooters there or we're likely in big trouble.
You're going to play Walton a lot. Not a 3-point threat.
You going to play Coleman a lot. Possibly passable from 3.
That's likely 4 of your five positions with nobody capable of putting up numbers comparable to Ish or Mallers.
So, given that we are going to shoot 3s, I would find it hard to argue with someone speculating that we could be one of the worst volume shooting 3-point teams in the country. Right now, we'd all better hope that Gunn finds an all-around game, that Bum finds his shot and that Thomas blooms.
|
|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on Apr 16, 2020 13:20:16 GMT -6
I do not think Bumbalough has a reduced role because of his talent. I think he played way too many minutes last year and wore down a bit
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Apr 16, 2020 13:20:40 GMT -6
That's likely 4 of your five positions with nobody capable of putting up numbers comparable to Ish or Mallers. This year we had 3 of 5 positions not comparable. 2 good shooters, 2 passable one poor.
We both think Bumbalough can be more effective than he was. And nobody thinks KJ is going to be a shooter, yet he can be a good player...
We should improve at one of those positions with Teague gone, or maybe substitute KJ for him in that department. Not unreasonable to think Coleman is better. Reggie Jones is career 33% from 3, not up to Ish, not bad. It's not as much difference as all that.
My premise is we spread the shooting around and get more good looks with more shooters.
But you are right, that shooting is a question mark and that's why having Windham available would be a plus.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Apr 16, 2020 13:51:06 GMT -6
I do not think Bumbalough has a reduced role because of his talent. I think he played way too many minutes last year and wore down a bit Agreed. That hurt his shooting, and shots during that extended time which might normally have been good shots were not. Less could be more for him. I also don't think we were working to get him his shot because Ish was first option. He can get more and better shots as the primary long range threat.
I hoped Thomas would play more at forward opposite Mallers with Ish and Coleman at guard. Maybe Ish and Bumbalough before we saw Coleman win the battle for PT and we had to play him.
If we had been able to get Thomas into play we'd have seen what I wanted to see more of, KJ and Bumbalough playing together off the bench.
KJ healthy would have been the third guard some of the time. Adding up to less time for Bumbalough but probably better for him.
|
|
|
Post by lmills72 on Apr 16, 2020 14:59:41 GMT -6
That's likely 4 of your five positions with nobody capable of putting up numbers comparable to Ish or Mallers. This year we had 3 of 5 positions not comparable. 2 good shooters, 2 passable one poor. What does this even mean? Are you saying this past year we had 3 of 5 players not comparable to Ish and Mallers when the other two players WERE Ish and Mallers? What point are you trying to make?
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Apr 16, 2020 15:16:52 GMT -6
??
We both want more shooting.
Ish and Mallers were good. Teague poor. 2 other starters, decent.
We lose 2 good, one poor shooter.
Next year not now completely certain. But, let's expect returning players to improve. And we already add a decent shooter. Part way there.
|
|
|
Post by lmills72 on Apr 16, 2020 15:25:38 GMT -6
OK, now I understand. You just wanted to repeat things we already knew and say that nobody knows about next year, but you're hopeful.
Truthfully, I would have known that without you posting anything, but good job anyway.
|
|
|
Post by realitycheck on Apr 16, 2020 15:52:25 GMT -6
That's likely 4 of your five positions with nobody capable of putting up numbers comparable to Ish or Mallers. This year we had 3 of 5 positions not comparable. 2 good shooters, 2 passable one poor.
We both think Bumbalough can be more effective than he was. And nobody thinks KJ is going to be a shooter, yet he can be a good player...
We should improve at one of those positions with Teague gone, or maybe substitute KJ for him in that department. Not unreasonable to think Coleman is better. Reggie Jones is career 33% from 3, not up to Ish, not bad. It's not as much difference as all that.
My premise is we spread the shooting around and get more good looks with more shooters.
But you are right, that shooting is a question mark and that's why having Windham available would be a plus.
So, if I am playing us I'd just put big pressure on the perimeter because we have no one like Teague any more to command attention inside. Who do I fear inside from Ball State next year? No bullshit answers either.
|
|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on Apr 16, 2020 16:46:41 GMT -6
Live and die by the three to the extreme
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Apr 16, 2020 17:31:37 GMT -6
Why not just go full Paul Westhead Loyola Marymount? It would be fun. It would get BSU noticed on the recruiting trail. And what the hell do we have to lose?
Of course, I know the score. It's easy enough to follow the current trendy move towards more three point shooting, but to do something DIFFERENT, whether in playing style or coaching search takes actual balls, which exist only in the most microscopic quantity around the BSU basketball program and administration.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Apr 16, 2020 18:06:13 GMT -6
So, if I am playing us I'd just put big pressure on the perimeter because we have no one like Teague any more to command attention inside. Who do I fear inside from Ball State next year? No bullshit answers either. The bullshit would be that pressuring outside doesn't give up something. In absence of a good post up game teams score in the paint more on the drive. We will miss Teague, who scored well inside, but not so much on pure post up. We may not have anybody as good, but I'll wager we don't completely abandon post play. As I recall people here before this year commonly said Teague could not play effectively there. It was outside play commanding attention that freed him to score. More by moving, cutting and using space when he got the ball.
|
|