Fire Coach Woodson Thread

[AH1971 1,577]

1 minute ago, iu eyedoc said:

Let's do the math. We'll take your pie in the sky high ends for sh*ts and giggles. 140 made 3's on 400 attempts at your mythical 35%

An additional 420 points on offense.

Now let's subtract those 400 additional shots from IU's 2 point shooting last season which shot at .534 from inside the arc.

That is  214 made 2's for a grand total of...class...428 pts.

I'm kind of a simple guy. Help me figure out how subtracting 428 pts and adding 420 points skyrockets the 215th ranked offense to top 15.

 

Carlyle and Rice not going to make a shot inside the arc or at the free throw line next year lol?

[iu eyedoc 2,107]

1 minute ago, AH1971 said:

Carlyle and Rice not going to make a shot inside the arc or at the free throw line next year lol?

What are you talking about? You want to add 400 3 pt attempts but not subtract 2 pt attempts? Are you honestly saying IU is going to add 400+ offensive possessions?  Those shots are coming from somewhere.

[AH1971 1,577]

4 minutes ago, iu eyedoc said:

Let's do the math. We'll take your pie in the sky high ends for sh*ts and giggles. 140 made 3's on 400 attempts at your mythical 35%

An additional 420 points on offense.

Now let's subtract those 400 additional shots from IU's 2 point shooting last season which shot at .534 from inside the arc.

That is  214 made 2's for a grand total of...class...428 pts.

I'm kind of a simple guy. Help me figure out how subtracting 428 pts and adding 420 points skyrockets the 215th ranked offense to top 15.

 

Also you understand that between Galloway, Cupps, Johnson, Leal, and Gunn, the 5 of them combined went 77/238 for 32% last year. You get that correct? Asking how the offense will improve with two guys shooting 35% from 3 on volume before even taking into consideration production from Mgbako, Reneau, and Ballo is legit asinine.

[Hornsby 2,226]

We win the offseason again. I'm not at all convinced this is a tournament team.
Ballo raises our floor, but he is not an upgrade over Ware. Plus those FT shooting numbers will cost us late in some games. 
We've done nothing to fix our most glaring issue, which is shooting. I don't want to hear people telling me how excited I should be about adding guys who shot 30% from 3 last year. That doesn't mean the issue has been solved, it means the jury is still out.
I do like Rice. We needed Conwell though.
Mgbako is a big key for next year. If he picks up where we left off, we could be very solid. 

But Woodson said he is here to win national titles. Well he bought his best roster yet so the expectation need to be sky high. 20 wins isn't going to cut it now


Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk

[AH1971 1,577]

16 minutes ago, iu eyedoc said:

What are you talking about? You want to add 400 3 pt attempts but not subtract 2 pt attempts? Are you honestly saying IU is going to add 400+ offensive possessions?  Those shots are coming from somewhere.

400 extra possessions equates to roughly 11 more possessions a game over the course of a 35 game season. Playing at a slightly faster tempo with dynamic guards + Ballo’s offensive rebounding potency doesn’t make this nearly as far fetched as you want to make it out to be. And that’s using the absolute high end scenario I ascribed. 

[iu eyedoc 2,107]

33 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

Also you understand that between Galloway, Cupps, Johnson, Leal, and Gunn, the 5 of them combined went 77/238 for 32% last year. You get that correct? Asking how the offense will improve with two guys shooting 35% from 3 on volume before even taking into consideration production from Mgbako, Reneau, and Ballo is legit asinine.

Again, if they are shooting 400 times from 3 and hitting a waaaaay below average  35%,  which would be a huge improvement from their collective 29% last season, that is not adding offensive efficiency or PPG.

Even your made up sophomore leap of 6% better from three on their 75% increase of volume in attempts leads to a negative overall offensive efficiency. 

If the entire team shoots 35% from 3 that is still only good for 125th last season.

It's funny how you add these mythical improved numbers to these players and it is still a subpar offense.

 

Hell,  let me  just give you 400 additional shots with 140 made threes pretending that doesn't effect the 2 point shots at all. That still only gets IU to top 30 range in PPG.

But...uh oh... unless unless IU gets 260 offensive rebounds on those 260 missed 3's that isn't going to be good for our 245th ranked points allowed defense.

[HoosierAloha 30,077]

This should be year 1, not year 4, type stuff but I’ll be looking for leadership, the off-season work they put in this summer, and the dreaded e and e to begin the season. This might be as telling as any shooting % any individual or team total they put up this season. Is the attitude closer one of cohesion and battling for each other with a few leaders stepping forward or are we playing “Easy like a Sunday morning” style Woody ball again?

[AH1971 1,577]

28 minutes ago, iu eyedoc said:

Again, if they are shooting 400 times from 3 and hitting a waaaaay below average  35%,  which would be a huge improvement from their collective 29% last season, that is not adding offensive efficiency or PPG.

Even your made up sophomore leap of 6% better from three on their 75% increase of volume in attempts leads to a negative overall offensive efficiency. 

If the entire team shoots 35% from 3 that is still only good for 125th last season.

It's funny how you add these mythical improved numbers to these players and it is still a subpar offense.

 

Hell,  let me  just give you 400 additional shots with 140 made threes pretending that doesn't effect the 2 point shots at all. That still only gets IU to top 30 range in PPG.

But...uh oh... unless unless IU gets 260 offensive rebounds on those 260 missed 3's that isn't going to be good for our 245th ranked points allowed defense.

The 400 additional shots isn’t a hard number to overcome, gone are:

Ware’s 11 shots

Galloway’s 9 shots will significantly decrease with a new role. 9 to 5/6 seems appropriate

Gone are Xavier Johnson’s 6 shots

Gone are CJ Gunn’s 4 shots

Cupps dips from 4 to 2. 
 

That’s 28 additional shots a game that just became available.

Ballo 7-8 shots, Carlyle and Rice 10 shots, with 5 to 6 being from the perimeter. That’s not including a spike from Mgbako + Tucker and whatever 4/5 the staff brings in on

[Juwan Moye 341]

35 minutes ago, HoosierAloha said:

This should be year 1, not year 4, type stuff but I’ll be looking for leadership, the off-season work they put in this summer, and the dreaded e and e to begin the season. This might be as telling as any shooting % any individual or team total they put up this season. Is the attitude closer one of cohesion and battling for each other with a few leaders stepping forward or are we playing “Easy like a Sunday morning” style Woody ball again?

This is why his “it doesn’t matter who starts it matter who finishes” type lines frustrates me as a fan. It ABSOLUTELY matters who starts, that’s how you set the tone for a game. Too often we come out listless, especially against bad teams, and allow them to get confidence that they can compete.

Punch them in the mouth from the start and take any wind they may have out of their sails. Be relentless about the pursuit of excellence in all things at all times if the goal is actually a national championship.

[Class of '66 Old Fart 85,555]

And this thread was so peaceful and calm yesterday.   :-)

[iu eyedoc 2,107]

25 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

The 400 additional shots isn’t a hard number to overcome, gone are:

Ware’s 11 shots

Galloway’s 9 shots will significantly decrease with a new role. 9 to 5/6 seems appropriate

Gone are Xavier Johnson’s 6 shots

Gone are CJ Gunn’s 4 shots

Cupps dips from 4 to 2. 
 

That’s 28 additional shots a game that just became available.

Ballo 7-8 shots, Carlyle and Rice 10 shots, with 5 to 6 being from the perimeter. That’s not including a spike from Mgbako + Tucker and whatever 4/5 the staff brings in on

24 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

 

So , again, your numbers:

Ware: 11 shots at .586 = 13PPG

Galloway: 4 at.466 =4

X Johnson 6 at.425=5

CJ Gunn: 4 at .342=2.8

Cupps: 2 at.364= 1.4

That's 27 less shots that resulted in 26 PPG

 

Now you want to give:

Ballo 7 at .658= 9PPG

Rice 10 at .439=9

Carlyle 10 at.386=8

 

So 27 shots for an additional...wait for it...26 PPG.

Giving the youngsters a 5% bump in shooting% adds 2 pts but that also ignores Wares FT shooting advantage over Ballo so again, how is this producing a top 15 offense out of a 215th ranked offense?

 

FFS, I use your mythical numbers and this offense still suck.

Obviously not a math major

 

[AH1971 1,577]

3 minutes ago, iu eyedoc said:

So , again, your numbers:

Ware: 11 shots at .586 = 13PPG

Galloway: 4 at.466 =4

X Johnson 6 at.425=5

CJ Gunn: 4 at .342=2.8

Cupps: 2 at.364= 1.4

That's 27 less shots that resulted in 26 PPG

 

Now you want to give:

Ballo 7 at .658= 9PPG

Rice 10 at .439=9

Carlyle 10 at.386=8

 

So 27 shots for an additional...wait for it...26 PPG.

Giving the youngsters a 5% bump in shooting% adds 2 pts but that also ignores Wares FT shooting advantage over Ballo so again, how is this producing a top 15 offense out of a 215th ranked offense?

 

FFS, I use your mythical numbers and this offense still suck.

Obviously not a math major

 

Where the hell are you getting 215th ranked offense? They were 105th in KenPom efficiency. Carlyle and Rice shooting 35% on 5-6 3 point attempts along with Mgbako shooting his same % on a slightly higher volume than he did in the B10 last season is easily a top 15 KenPom offense next year once you factor in Ballo and Reneau’s efficiency at the rim.

[Uspshoosier 46,334]

27 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

Where the hell are you getting 215th ranked offense?

Mythical numbers 

[Juwan Moye 341]

1 minute ago, Uspshoosier said:

Mythical numbers 

I believe he’s quoting points per game, which is flawed, but here’s a screenshot. I’d trust KenPom more which had us at 105th.

[iu eyedoc 2,107]

10 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

Where the hell are you getting 215th ranked offense? They were 105th in KenPom efficiency. Carlyle and Rice shooting 35% on 5-6 3 point attempts along with Mgbako shooting his same % on a slightly higher volume than he did in the B10 last season is easily a top 15 KenPom offense next year once you factor in Ballo and Reneau’s efficiency at the rim.

They were 215 in PPG. As far as KenPom,  35% 3 point shooting doesn't improve their offensive efficiency. It is points per 100 possessions.

IU's OE was 109.8.  35% of 300 potential points is 105.  I'm sure you are about to say, but"offensive rebounds." Well add in that 3 point misses are rebounded 20% less often by the offense than 2's (Rebounding 2's vs 3's) and that would be an offensive efficiency nightmare. 

These players are nice additions, but barring an offensive and defensive renaissance by this coaching staff, next season will almost assuredly be painfully familiar.

Bad math and dreaming don't amount to ish.

[AH1971 1,577]

5 minutes ago, Juwan Moye said:

I believe he’s quoting points per game, which is flawed, but here’s a screenshot. I’d trust KenPom more which had us at 105th.

Yeah I don’t care how many ppg we score so long as it’s more than the other team. 

[AH1971 1,577]

29 minutes ago, iu eyedoc said:

They were 215 in PPG. As far as KenPom,  35% 3 point shooting doesn't improve their offensive efficiency. It is points per 100 possessions.

IU's OE was 109.8.  35% of 300 potential points is 105.  I'm sure you are about to say, but"offensive rebounds." Well add in that 3 point misses are rebounded 20% less often by the offense than 2's (Rebounding 2's vs 3's) and that would be an offensive efficiency nightmare. 

These players are nice additions, but barring an offensive and defensive renaissance by this coaching staff, next season will almost assuredly be painfully familiar.

Bad math and dreaming don't amount to ish.

3’s are worth more than 2’s….especially on a higher volume…..DERRRRR.
 

You ever stop and think that KenPom efficiency numbers were so low due to the fact that IU was a low make, low volume 3 point shooting team? I mean JC this isn’t that hard, when your 5 core backcourt players make 77 combined 3’s in a 30+ game season at a 32% clip, your efficiency numbers are going to suck.

[iu eyedoc 2,107]

2 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

Yeah I don’t care how many ppg we score so long as it’s more than the other team. 

Hate to break the news to you :

[iu eyedoc 2,107]

1 minute ago, AH1971 said:

You ever stop and think KenPom efficiency numbers were so low due to the fact that IU was a low make, low volume 3 point shooting team? I mean JC this isn’t that hard, when your 5 core backcourt players make 77 combined 3’s in a 30+ game season your efficiency numbers are going to suck.

But you are proposing they somehow become top 15 offense by adding 29%  3 pt shooters that magically become 35% 3pt shooters. That is not more efficient. 35% from 3 from your "shooters" sucks @$$. Even factoring in  the bigs and bench players 35% was 121st in percentage as a team last season. Making 35% of your threes is not more efficient than making 53% of your 2's, which IU did last season, factor in the offensive rebounding disparity and it is worse.

Your volume shooters have to be better than 35%.  76 of 86 qualified shooters last season ( more than 2.5 3's made) made greater than 35%.

You are making up huge leaps by these transfers just to improve them to be bottom 12 %  "shooters."

 

How do you not get that 35% shooting from your primary back court players, that which they can only dream of, is still crappy?

 

[Kentuckysucks 2,414]

Haha.