Miserable Myth #1
We jack up way too many 3's

Miserable Myth #2
Pastner is wrong when he says that it is mostly about making shots


Rankings out of 345 D1 teams...

2014
260 attempts per game
221 percentage

2013
161 attempts per game
46 percentage

The miserables will try to spin this to fit their agenda, but it is unspinnable.

When the team as a whole shoots 33% from three, almost any three is a bad three.

When the coach, after a large enough sample size of the season has passed says "we're a good shooting team" (despite solid numbers to the contrary) that is a problem

When the numbers show that the more shots AN and Shaq take>>>the higher % of wins, while the more shots the guards take<<<<<lower % of wins.

It's also not just that shots are take, it's when in the flow of a game they are taken. There was a sequence in the 1st half in which the Tigers came down three straight times and neither big touched the ball. That's not a good thing.

It's more than just the number.

From the sticky thread posted at the top of this forum:

1) "TAMMS, miserables," etc., when used directly to refer to an individual or individuals, also counts as "name-calling" and is against forum rules

Nothing good ever comes from this. Try to avoid name-calling in any form. It's polarizing and sets up bickering and petty disagreement. Don't assume that because you're a "good poster" or a "positive fan" that you're immune from the rules. Nobody likes to be labeled, ostracized, or marginalized. Treat those with differing ideas respectfully. To that end...

If you need a refresher, the rest is here:

http://csnbbs.com/thread-679656.html

(03-25-2014 11:42 AM)Stammers Wrote:  Miserable Myth #1
We jack up way too many 3's

Miserable Myth #2
Pastner is wrong when he says that it is mostly about making shots


Rankings out of 345 D1 teams...

2014
260 attempts per game
221 percentage

2013
161 attempts per game
46 percentage

The miserables will try to spin this to fit their agenda, but it is unspinnable.

OBVIOUSLY, making shots puts points on the board but there's a whole lot more to winning than just that. Defense, rebounding, efficiency, strategy, in-game decision making and putting systems in place to make it easier to score and defend. The last point being possibly most important.

Why are we so stuck on the offensive side? IMO it's about DEFENSE. DEFENSE won both Louisville games and the Gonzaga game. When we play good defense for 40 minutes we usually win and for sure don't get blown out.

(03-25-2014 12:04 PM)Downtown Tiger Wrote:  Why are we so stuck on the offensive side? IMO it's about DEFENSE. DEFENSE won both Louisville games and the Gonzaga game. When we play good defense for 40 minutes we usually win and for sure don't get blown out.

It is easier for people to talk about offense than defense. However, I agree that our problem is on the defensive side of the ball and not the offensive, at least the greater majority of the time. We had games, like Virginia were both were MIA.

(03-25-2014 11:48 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  When the team as a whole shoots 33% from three, almost any three is a bad three.

When the coach, after a large enough sample size of the season has passed says "we're a good shooting team" (despite solid numbers to the contrary) that is a problem

When the numbers show that the more shots AN and Shaq take>>>the higher % of wins, while the more shots the guards take<<<<<lower % of wins.

It's also not just that shots are take, it's when in the flow of a game they are taken. There was a sequence in the 1st half in which the Tigers came down three straight times and neither big touched the ball. That's not a good thing.

It's more than just the number.

It really IS a number.

Field Goal Attempts

2013
Black, Shaq, Ferro, Simpson
440 total
12.2 per game

2014
Shaq, Austin, Pellom, Woodson
624 total
18.4 per game

Quote:There was a sequence in the 1st half in which the Tigers came down three straight times and neither big touched the ball. That's not a good thing.

That is an anecdotal example, but over the course of the season; that is not a reason why the offense wasn't successful...The bigs took many more shots than they did last year. The guards took way less 3 point shots and looked inside much more.

We were 260th in the country in 3 point attempts. The guards looked inside much more. The obvious problem is that we were lousy from outside. We couldn't physically take LESS shots than we took. You can't be small and guard dominated and shoot so few 3's and make so few.

For us to be successful, we would have had to shoot 5-6 MORE threes per game, and have JJ and Geron make the combined 39% they made last year and not the combined 26% they made this year.

(03-25-2014 11:42 AM)Stammers Wrote:  Miserable Myth #1
We jack up way too many 3's

Miserable Myth #2
Pastner is wrong when he says that it is mostly about making shots


Rankings out of 345 D1 teams...

2014
260 attempts per game
221 percentage

2013
161 attempts per game
46 percentage

The miserables will try to spin this to fit their agenda, but it is unspinnable.

The season is over and culminated in an ass kicking in the first weekend of the tournament again... What needs spinning? Our defense needs major attention along with our half court offense. Who cares about trying to "spin" three point numbers? Clearly, whatever we did was not effective enough to make an NCAA tournament run.

Talking about defense doesn't satisfy the op's agenda. I've noticed he only pulls stats that fit his argument and ignores everything else. Or calls you names like most mature adults do.

(03-25-2014 12:01 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(03-25-2014 11:42 AM)Stammers Wrote:  Miserable Myth #1
We jack up way too many 3's

Miserable Myth #2
Pastner is wrong when he says that it is mostly about making shots


Rankings out of 345 D1 teams...

2014
260 attempts per game
221 percentage

2013
161 attempts per game
46 percentage

The miserables will try to spin this to fit their agenda, but it is unspinnable.

OBVIOUSLY, making shots puts points on the board but there's a whole lot more to winning than just that. Defense, rebounding, efficiency, strategy, in-game decision making and putting systems in place to make it easier to score and defend. The last point being possibly most important.

Yes, adjustments like Coach K made and player development like Bill Self accomplished with Tarik Black.

We just happen to be talking about offense, but the usual miserables can't even focus on that because it doesn't fit their agenda.

(03-25-2014 12:18 PM)Stammers Wrote:  We just happen to be talking about offense, but the usual miserables can't even focus on that because it doesn't fit their agenda.

So what's your agenda?

(03-25-2014 12:15 PM)Malachi Wrote:  Talking about defense doesn't satisfy the op's agenda. I've noticed he only pulls stats that fit his argument and ignores everything else. Or calls you names like most mature adults do.

The usual bizarre negative nonsense from you. I can come up with at least 10 criticisms I have made in the last 3 days. There is nothing positive or remotely interesting that ever comes out of your trap. At least you are consistent; keep up the good work.

(03-25-2014 12:16 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(03-25-2014 12:01 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(03-25-2014 11:42 AM)Stammers Wrote:  Miserable Myth #1
We jack up way too many 3's

Miserable Myth #2
Pastner is wrong when he says that it is mostly about making shots


Rankings out of 345 D1 teams...

2014
260 attempts per game
221 percentage

2013
161 attempts per game
46 percentage

The miserables will try to spin this to fit their agenda, but it is unspinnable.

OBVIOUSLY, making shots puts points on the board but there's a whole lot more to winning than just that. Defense, rebounding, efficiency, strategy, in-game decision making and putting systems in place to make it easier to score and defend. The last point being possibly most important.

Yes, adjustments like Coach K made and player development like Bill Self accomplished with Tarik Black.

Self got Tarik to shoot 70% from the floor. The year before josh coached him up to 58%

Free throws: self coached him to 60%. Pastner year before 45%.

Looks like he did coach him up

(03-25-2014 12:21 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(03-25-2014 12:15 PM)Malachi Wrote:  Talking about defense doesn't satisfy the op's agenda. I've noticed he only pulls stats that fit his argument and ignores everything else. Or calls you names like most mature adults do.

The usual bizarre negative nonsense from you. I can come up with at least 10 criticisms I have made in the last 3 days. There is nothing positive or remotely interesting that ever comes out of your trap. At least you are consistent; keep up the good work.

Aw are you crying again? Poor baby boy/or girl.

(03-25-2014 12:16 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(03-25-2014 12:01 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(03-25-2014 11:42 AM)Stammers Wrote:  Miserable Myth #1
We jack up way too many 3's

Miserable Myth #2
Pastner is wrong when he says that it is mostly about making shots


Rankings out of 345 D1 teams...

2014
260 attempts per game
221 percentage

2013
161 attempts per game
46 percentage

The miserables will try to spin this to fit their agenda, but it is unspinnable.

OBVIOUSLY, making shots puts points on the board but there's a whole lot more to winning than just that. Defense, rebounding, efficiency, strategy, in-game decision making and putting systems in place to make it easier to score and defend. The last point being possibly most important.

Yes, adjustments like Coach K made and player development like Bill Self accomplished with Tarik Black.

Yeah, there you go with the coach K stuff. Bill Self? Who cares. But coach K? Ok then

(03-25-2014 12:23 PM)Malachi Wrote:  

(03-25-2014 12:16 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(03-25-2014 12:01 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(03-25-2014 11:42 AM)Stammers Wrote:  Miserable Myth #1
We jack up way too many 3's

Miserable Myth #2
Pastner is wrong when he says that it is mostly about making shots


Rankings out of 345 D1 teams...

2014
260 attempts per game
221 percentage

2013
161 attempts per game
46 percentage

The miserables will try to spin this to fit their agenda, but it is unspinnable.

OBVIOUSLY, making shots puts points on the board but there's a whole lot more to winning than just that. Defense, rebounding, efficiency, strategy, in-game decision making and putting systems in place to make it easier to score and defend. The last point being possibly most important.

Yes, adjustments like Coach K made and player development like Bill Self accomplished with Tarik Black.

Self got Tarik to shoot 70% from the floor. The year before josh coached him up to 58%

Free throws: self coached him to 60%. Pastner year before 45%.

Looks like he did coach him up

How did Self do about Black's penchant for fouling? Did Black's points per game improve? I'm not going to say that you're not very bright, but maybe you should have thought things out a little bit before posting. By stating only the negative AGAIN; like you always do; you proved my point.

Keep up the good work; you're doing great.

(03-25-2014 12:14 PM)Stammers Wrote:  We were 260th in the country in 3 point attempts. The guards looked inside much more. The obvious problem is that we were lousy from outside. We couldn't physically take LESS shots than we took. You can't be small and guard dominated and shoot so few 3's and make so few.

For us to be successful, we would have had to shoot 5-6 MORE threes per game, and have JJ and Geron make the combined 39% they made last year and not the combined 26% they made this year.

They could have driven more...couldn't they?

74.5% of Crawfords shots were from three. SEVENTY FOUR PERCENT. Last year it was 58.4%.

Even you have noted how rarely CC and GJ got to the line. Crawford took a career low 29 free throw attempts this year. Not even averaging ONE ft a game.

45.8 of Dixon's shots were three, as compared to his time at Mizzou when he took 41%. Not a huge difference, but still an increase. He averaged a three every 5.9 mins of game play (quicker than the 6.9 his last yr at Mizzou).

So, yeah, they could have still taken fewer. Or better shots.

(03-25-2014 12:33 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(03-25-2014 12:14 PM)Stammers Wrote:  We were 260th in the country in 3 point attempts. The guards looked inside much more. The obvious problem is that we were lousy from outside. We couldn't physically take LESS shots than we took. You can't be small and guard dominated and shoot so few 3's and make so few.

For us to be successful, we would have had to shoot 5-6 MORE threes per game, and have JJ and Geron make the combined 39% they made last year and not the combined 26% they made this year.

They could have driven more...couldn't they?

74.5% of Crawfords shots were from three. SEVENTY FOUR PERCENT. Last year it was 58.4%.

Even you have noted how rarely CC and GJ got to the line. Crawford took a career low 29 free throw attempts this year. Not even averaging ONE ft a game.

45.8 of Dixon's shots were three, as compared to his time at Mizzou when he took 41%. Not a huge difference, but still an increase. He averaged a three every 5.9 mins of game play (quicker than the 6.9 his last yr at Mizzou).

So, yeah, they could have still taken fewer. Or better shots.

Yes, obviously they would have been better off ranking #345 in three point attempts. We jacked up too many of them; "only" 259 teams shot more of them than us. No mention at all of the bigs shooting 6 more shots per game than last year. Same old, same old.

(03-25-2014 12:32 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(03-25-2014 12:23 PM)Malachi Wrote:  

(03-25-2014 12:16 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(03-25-2014 12:01 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(03-25-2014 11:42 AM)Stammers Wrote:  Miserable Myth #1
We jack up way too many 3's

Miserable Myth #2
Pastner is wrong when he says that it is mostly about making shots


Rankings out of 345 D1 teams...

2014
260 attempts per game
221 percentage

2013
161 attempts per game
46 percentage

The miserables will try to spin this to fit their agenda, but it is unspinnable.

OBVIOUSLY, making shots puts points on the board but there's a whole lot more to winning than just that. Defense, rebounding, efficiency, strategy, in-game decision making and putting systems in place to make it easier to score and defend. The last point being possibly most important.

Yes, adjustments like Coach K made and player development like Bill Self accomplished with Tarik Black.

Self got Tarik to shoot 70% from the floor. The year before josh coached him up to 58%

Free throws: self coached him to 60%. Pastner year before 45%.

Looks like he did coach him up

How did Self do about Black's penchant for fouling? Did Black's points per game improve? I'm not going to say that you're not very bright, but maybe you should have thought things out a little bit before posting. By stating only the negative AGAIN; like you always do; you proved my point.

Keep up the good work; you're doing great.

The fouling was definitely still a problem. But Tarik did his part to win that Oklahoma State game in the Big XII tourney with 2 big foul shots when they were down 2 late. And he scored 18 against Stanford before fouling out. I really don't think Tarik was THAT bad here. He just had a bad junior season.