IUBB vs Iowa - Tuesday, 2/28/23 @ 7:00 on ESPN2

[RaceToTheTop 27,592]

1 hour ago, Golfman25 said:

Sure, but define "good" at 3 pt shots.  Then you need to compare to 2 point shots.  33% from three equals 50% from 2.  Looking at the stats, most teams run just over 50% from 2.  So anything above 33% from three has a positive expectancy over 2s.  Iowa's number are 34.7% and 52.3% = which is about equal (and no idea what they are the past few games coming off that MSU beatdown). So you better guard both, which we didn't. 

IU's numbers are 37.8 and 53.2, which actually gives us a 1 pt advantage via the 3.  Yet we want to focus on inside with TJD, which is fine if he passes out for the 3.   

Bottom line, the only way you can leave three points open is if their percentage is below the 2 pt shot equivalent, about 33% vs 50%.  In that case you want them to take 3s, not 2s.  But teams are shooting above that these days, and that is my point.  

Getting more people interior shots should produce more fouls and free throws, though.  Shooting more threes does seem to produce more offensive rebounds due to the longer rebounds.  I’m not sure that ultimately 33% three point shooting will produce a higher point per possession than 50% twos.  Would be an interesting case study.

[Golfman25 6,102]

1 hour ago, str8baller said:

IU gets open 3’s. Which is why we shoot a high percentage. We get open 3’s cause we force the ball into our nearly unstoppable AA post player who is shooting .574 even through constant double teams. He’d be well over 60% if single covered every game. So we’d have to 1) create a bunch more threes—because we really don’t take very many—without the aid of the post-up, and 2) make them at about a 40% clip to justify not throwing the ball into TJD.    
 

I have seen absolutely nothing from us when TJD is off the floor to suggest that we can create enough high quality 3pt looks w/o his post touches to justify basing our offense off of that instead of his post scoring ability. 
 

Nothing happens in a vacuum and the other teams get to try and alter what you do, as well. 

Sure, with a guy like TJD you play inside out.  Without him, you'll need to adjust to something else.    My only point was in response to why we (and the Archie Miller teams) don't seem to guard the 3 very well -- it's old school thinking, that's all.  

But I will point out, ever since he said he was "ungardable," well he's kinda been "guardable." 

 

[Golfman25 6,102]

43 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

Getting more people interior shots should produce more fouls and free throws, though.  Shooting more threes does seem to produce more offensive rebounds due to the longer rebounds.  I’m not sure that ultimately 33% three point shooting will produce a higher point per possession than 50% twos.  Would be an interesting case study.

More fouls, lol.  Have you watched the Big10 lately.  :)  Oh, and then you have to make your free thows which seems to be a lost art these days.  :) 

33% doesn't produce a higher point per possession, it's equal.  But 38% does.  That's not necessarily the point I was making though.  The question is how much attention should a defense pay to the 3 pt. shot -- In other words sacrifice some interior defense to defend the 3.   In the old days, it didn't matter because nobody could shoot the darn thing.  Today they can.  And once they start to hit 33% or so, it becomes a problem if you don't defend it.  For the past 6 years, we haven't been very good at defending it.  Last night, Iowa was 56.5% from three and only 55.6% from 2.  Ouch.  

[WayneFleekHoosier 49,514]

Are we sure he’s coming back? At this point,  I just assume he isn’t or will give us very little if he does. At most he has about ten days to round into shape before the tourney.

Maybe the staff trying to sell him on a medical redshirt so he can comeback and “be the man”. Plenty of space in the cupboard.


Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners mobile app

[NashvilleHoosier 3,768]

1 hour ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

Maybe the staff trying to sell him on a medical redshirt so he can comeback and “be the man”. Plenty of space in the cupboard.


Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners mobile app

I’ve been wondering about the possibility of a medical redshirt. Not sure it’s possible b/c he played in 11 games. I believe you have to have played in less than 30% of games. Not sure if that includes the postseason. If not, he’s definitely over 30%. If it does, math isn’t my strong suit but I think we’d have to play 37 games to keep it under 30%. So 6 games between the BTT and the dance. Not impossible, but…

[normandale97 435]

15 hours ago, str8baller said:

Are we sure he’s coming back? At this point,  I just assume he isn’t or will give us very little if he does. At most he has about ten days to round into shape before the tourney.

Pretty sure the plan is for him to play vs Michigan unless he has some sort of setback before Sunday. 

[Whoozhers 3,744]

I still have the worst hangover funk from Tuesday’s game.

I didn’t drink a drop either.

Maybe I should have.

[str8baller 6,155]

On 3/1/2023 at 6:44 PM, Golfman25 said:

In the old days, it didn't matter because nobody could shoot the darn thing.

Alford shot 53% from 3 on 6 attempts.  I don’t think you’re perception of history is accurate.  
 

Our problem is execution, not some antiquated system. 

[Golfman25 6,102]

14 minutes ago, str8baller said:

Alford shot 53% from 3 on 6 attempts.  I don’t think you’re perception of history is accurate.  
 

Our problem is execution, not some antiquated system. 

So back when they put the 3 point line in I was at Bobby Knight’s annual talk to the students.  He was specifically asked about the new 3 point shot.  He’s response:  I’m not really concerned.  I have the only player who can shoot the darn thing.  
 

Alford was the exception that proved the rule.  :)

[Alford Bailey 12,646]

2 hours ago, Whoozhers said:

I still have the worst hangover funk from Tuesday’s game.

I didn’t drink a drop either.

Maybe I should have.

The Journey next week is gonna be awful 

[str8baller 6,155]

27 minutes ago, Golfman25 said:

So back when they put the 3 point line in I was at Bobby Knight’s annual talk to the students.  He was specifically asked about the new 3 point shot.  He’s response:  I’m not really concerned.  I have the only player who can shoot the darn thing.  
 

Alford was the exception that proved the rule.  :)

Knight famously hated the 3pt line. And he famously exaggerated to make a point. 
 

He knew Alford wasn’t the exception because several seasons back when they experimented with the 3pt line, Kitchel or Whittman…I forget which now…shot over 60% from 3.

 

And of course, the great UNLV team IU beat had a great 3 point shooter who put up 9 attempts a game.
 

I think you were duped by The General. :) 

[Golfman25 6,102]

37 minutes ago, str8baller said:

Knight famously hated the 3pt line. And he famously exaggerated to make a point. 
 

He knew Alford wasn’t the exception because several seasons back when they experimented with the 3pt line, Kitchel or Whittman…I forget which now…shot over 60% from 3.

 

And of course, the great UNLV team IU beat had a great 3 point shooter who put up 9 attempts a game.
 

I think you were duped by The General. :) 

Knight would be considered old school.  

Think you're missing the point.  You're citing single players who put up single-digit 3s per game.  Iowa as a team made more than we shot.  

[str8baller 6,155]

35 minutes ago, Golfman25 said:

Knight would be considered old school.  

Think you're missing the point.  You're citing single players who put up single-digit 3s per game.  Iowa as a team made more than we shot.  

Yet Knight knew how to defend the 3. If that’s old school then I’m not sure what the distinction is. 
 

I’m citing counterfactuals to your erroneous statement that players back then couldn’t shoot 3’s. I have no idea what single-digit 3’s has to do with anything. Since I have the ‘87 page pulled up: the leader in 3’s made that year made 158/362. The leader last year made 142/364. The leader in 3% last year was 47% which was considerably lower than Alford’s 53% in 1987.   
 

Looking at team stats (I had to go to 93 here because of the way they kept team stats) the top 3 shooting teams launch about 20% more last year than the top teams, by volume, in ‘93 but the top ‘93 teams were considerably better 3 point shooters, on average. 
 

You’re assertion that 3pt shooters in the “old days” were worse than now is simply false. I think you could make the case that teams now let more bad shooters shoot 3’s. That’s not really going to fundamentally change how you guard someone, though. 

[coonhounds 9,844]

Yet Knight knew how to defend the 3. If that’s old school then I’m not sure what the distinction is. 
 
I’m citing counterfactuals to your erroneous statement that players back then couldn’t shoot 3’s. I have no idea what single-digit 3’s has to do with anything. Since I have the ‘87 page pulled up: the leader in 3’s made that year made 158/362. The leader last year made 142/364. The leader in 3% last year was 47% which was considerably lower than Alford’s 53% in 1987.   
 
Looking at team stats (I had to go to 93 here because of the way they kept team stats) the top 3 shooting teams launch about 20% more last year than the top teams, by volume, in ‘93 but the top ‘93 teams were considerably better 3 point shooters, on average. 
 
You’re assertion that 3pt shooters in the “old days” were worse than now is simply false. I think you could make the case that teams now let more bad shooters shoot 3’s. That’s not really going to fundamentally change how you guard someone, though. 

Don't discount defending the three is monumentally tougher today than in knights day. The line has been moved back a few times since which creates greater distance the d has to move out to defend. I would also argue the kids practicing that shot from grade school on is meaningful to alot better shooting. When I was young shooting that distance was frowned upon unless you were proven

Sent from my SM-A326U using Tapatalk

[Golfman25 6,102]

2 hours ago, str8baller said:

Yet Knight knew how to defend the 3. If that’s old school then I’m not sure what the distinction is. 
 

I’m citing counterfactuals to your erroneous statement that players back then couldn’t shoot 3’s. I have no idea what single-digit 3’s has to do with anything. Since I have the ‘87 page pulled up: the leader in 3’s made that year made 158/362. The leader last year made 142/364. The leader in 3% last year was 47% which was considerably lower than Alford’s 53% in 1987.   
 

Looking at team stats (I had to go to 93 here because of the way they kept team stats) the top 3 shooting teams launch about 20% more last year than the top teams, by volume, in ‘93 but the top ‘93 teams were considerably better 3 point shooters, on average. 
 

Your assertion that 3pt shooters in the “old days” were worse than now is simply false. I think you could make the case that teams now let more bad shooters shoot 3’s. That’s not really going to fundamentally change how you guard someone, though. 

That’s not my assertion.  You’re looking at single players.  Look at depth.  Are there not more players shooting higher percentages today than back when?   Currently there are 42 players shooting 40% or better.  245 teams shooting 33% or better.  In 1998, there were 204 teams shooting 33% or better.  That’s a 20% increase.  
 

 

[Scotty R 2,778]

21 hours ago, Golfman25 said:

So back when they put the 3 point line in I was at Bobby Knight’s annual talk to the students.  He was specifically asked about the new 3 point shot.  He’s response:  I’m not really concerned.  I have the only player who can shoot the darn thing.  
 

Alford was the exception that proved the rule.  :)

There were plenty of great shooters in the 80's and 90's, don't know where you get your info.

[Scotty R 2,778]

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2018-11-12/tracking-strange-ways-college-basketball-field-goal

Article on how shooting percentages changed over the years

[Golfman25 6,102]

14 hours ago, Scotty R said:

There were plenty of great shooters in the 80's and 90's, don't know where you get your info.

That particular bit came from Knight himself.  
 

I think the article you posted sums it up pretty good.  It took time for the 3 pt shot to become a thing.  Then this line is what I’m talking about — “In fact, after a period of stagnation from 1995 to 2015, Division I teams have shot more and more 3-pointers each year, while — strangely enough — field goal percentage has increased in each of the past four years.”   My point being if you have a defensive scheme based on the 1995-2015 time period which sacrifices the 3 to defend the paint you may need to adjust.  Archie’s pack line did that — focused on the paint and we didn’t guard the three very well.  Jury is still out, but Woodson’s defense might suffer a similar fate.  That’s all I’m saying.  

[realTomCrean 1,806]

KRIS MURRAY IS A BUM FRAN MCCAFFERY IS A BUM