Transfer Portal w IU Interest

[go iu bb]

20 hours ago, Class of '66 Old Fart said:

Let's not get too carried away.  Getting the recruits is one thing.  Coaching them is something else.

So you're saying it's too early for the undefeated t-shirts? 

Crap, I wonder if I can get my deposit back...And what am I going to do about this tattoo?

[lillurk]

8 minutes ago, Silat Player said:

I'm more concerned whether this staff believes in analytics. If they did, then they would probably believe in the three point shot...

I agree. I will say this one is so simple that anyone who took normal HS math should get it, not just 3>2 but 3*33%=2*50%

[IU - Kaulie]

I haven’t been on in a couple days so trying to catch up.

It looks like a lot of Rice, Carlyle, and Ballo.  
A lot of talk about how good we are going to be, and just wait, because we have never had any guards or wings outside JHS.  Miller Kopp says hello. 
Rice moves the needle, but the three I really liked remains.  So what about Conwell, Hickman, and Humrichous?  If we are prioritizing other guards over Conwell and Hickman, who I think could be had, I think that’s a mistake.

[Jam]

I am not sure we are prioritizing over them. It just seems Carlyle has showed more interest. 

[WayneFleekHoosier]

I feel like some other programs are taking the moneyball analytics approach in portal and we are trying to build the best fantasy team.  I hope Woodson and Indiana can have a big year.  I genuinely think Woodson and his Burners go the fan blaming route if it doesn’t work out.  Scorched earth on the fans is the last thing we need as a program.  
 

It is fun winning recruiting battles. No doubt Kentucky is in a dazed and confused mode with winning recruiting vs winning on the court.  
 

Let’s do both. 

[Feathery]

1 hour ago, lillurk said:

I agree. I will say this one is so simple that anyone who took normal HS math should get it, not just 3>2 but 3*33%=2*50%

ok I’ll take this one on just to be a contrarian bc I don’t necessarily disagree with you. 
 

Not to be that guy but if you took a 100 3pt shots and made 33% that’s 99 points. If you took 100 2’s and made 50% that’s 100 points. So 3*33 = 2*50% is not correct. It’s actually less than.  
 

Again not trying to be a jerk but the magic number is 34% from 3 is better than 50% from 2. But when you have a quality post like TJD or and Edey shooting 58%/62% from 2 then to value the 3 point line a shooter would need to shoot 38.6% and 41.3% from 3 respectively. 
 

Malik Reneau shot 55.8% from 2, meaning an IU shooter needs to shoot it 37.2% from 3 to break even. Mgbako could do that but not until he got comfortable. There wasn’t anyone else on the roster who could shoot it well enough, outside of Mgbako and Wade, to forgo giving it to Reneau for a 2 pt attempt. Ware shot even better at 59.9% from 2, meaning a 3pt shooter needed to shoot it at 39.9% to break even. Ware shot it from 3 well and should have shot it more and that should definitely be a criticism. 
 

So from an analytic perspective shooting more 3’s as a team wasn’t the correct answer and I didn’t believe it was during the season. Having the right guys shoot them was the correct answer but it was aware and Mgbako, then X when healthy but he was up and down do to being hurt. 

[lillurk]

2 minutes ago, Schreckbagger said:

Interesting article.....

https://www.futurity.org/three-point-shot-deflation-3179922/

Sent from my SM-S906U using BtownBanners mobile app
 

Yes! Saw something similar earlier this year. Thanks for sharing.

I don’t think CBB is quite caught up to the NBA in this regard yet.

[Jam]

5 minutes ago, Schreckbagger said:

Interesting article.....

https://www.futurity.org/three-point-shot-deflation-3179922/

Sent from my SM-S906U using BtownBanners mobile app
 

Last year our three best players were Ware, Reneau, and Mgbacko. We had no guards. From this has sprung the whole story of a lack of modern offense, two posts, pound it in 80s basketball and a whole lot of Woodson hate. I hope and think things will look a lot different with dynamic guards that can break down a defense and some more capable shooters.

[lillurk]

7 minutes ago, Feathery said:

ok I’ll take this one on just to be a contrarian bc I don’t necessarily disagree with you. 
 

Not to be that guy but if you took a 100 3pt shots and made 33% that’s 99 points. If you took 100 2’s and made 50% that’s 100 points. So 3*33 = 2*50% is not correct. It’s actually less than.  
 

Again not trying to be a jerk but the magic number is 34% from 3 is better than 50% from 2. But when you have a quality post like TJD or and Edey shooting 58%/62% from 2 then to value the 3 point line a shooter would need to shoot 38.6% and 41.3% from 3 respectively. 
 

Malik Reneau shot 55.8% from 2, meaning an IU shooter needs to shoot it 37.2% from 3 to break even. Mgbako could do that but not until he got comfortable. There wasn’t anyone else on the roster who could shoot it well enough, outside of Mgbako and Wade, to forgo giving it to Reneau for a 2 pt attempt. Ware shot even better at 59.9% from 2, meaning a 3pt shooter needed to shoot it at 39.9% to break even. Ware shot it from 3 well and should have shot it more and that should definitely be a criticism. 
 

So from an analytic perspective shooting more 3’s as a team wasn’t the correct answer and I didn’t believe it was during the season. Having the right guys shoot them was the correct answer but it was aware and Mgbako, then X when healthy but he was up and down do to being hurt. 

Yes, great post, you’re not being a jerk!

I will say: can’t pinpoint the episode but the Cleveland Cavs beat writer was on an episode of Zach Lowe’s podcast, The Lowe Post. He said something that stuck with me:

The Cavs undertook a study within the last few years, basically a chicken/egg thing. They asked: does making 3s create offensive spacing, or does simply taking them create the threat and do so?

And they found that spacing comes from 3pt volume, not accuracy.* So they signed Max Strus, and even though he shot 35% last year in Miami, and he’s about there this year, they’re pleased when he puts one up because it allows more room for Donovan Mitchell to drive, more room for their bigs to work inside, and so on.

Put differently: yes, IU was a mediocre 3pt shooting team this year, but they probably still should’ve shot more, because trading a few forced 2s for some 3s opens things up, 3s provide more likely OReb opportunities, etc.

*I would guess there’s a lower limit here. If Payton Sparks is hoisting every time he touches it from 30 feet in, that wouldn’t matter much.

[Trish]

4 minutes ago, lillurk said:

Yes! Saw something similar earlier this year. Thanks for sharing.

I don’t think CBB is quite caught up to the NBA in this regard yet.

https://x.com/kirkgoldsberry/status/1773340844923216049?s=46
 

Indiana hired an NBA coach who doesn’t believe in the 3PT shot. Without turning this into a Woodson debate, I will give him the benefit of the doubt that college players are significantly worse than NBA players. It’s very interesting that Indiana doesn’t prioritize the most important and modern shot in 2024.

Perhaps Malik can develop a 3PT shot while Ballo plugs up the paint. The potential transfers coming in will have their work cut out for them with the inside style of player Woodson wants to play next season. Frankly, I wouldn’t consider Indiana if I was a guard who could and wants to score. But Money Talks! 
 

I think Indiana will likely get a commitment by Monday. If there’s no commitments by Wednesday then that would be a cause of concern. 

[go iu bb]

33 minutes ago, Feathery said:

Not to be that guy but if you took a 100 3pt shots and made 33% that’s 99 points. If you took 100 2’s and made 50% that’s 100 points. So 3*33 = 2*50% is not correct. It’s actually less than.  

People often shorten 33 1/3% to 33%. So it works out like this: The shooter has hit 33 out 99 shots for 99 points. The last shot goes in 1 out of 3 times so, on average, they'll get 100 points. Or, if you don't like the idea of making a fraction of a shot, if they shoot 300 shots, they'll make 100 of them for 300 points.

So 33.333....%  from 3 is the same effective field goal percentage as 50% on 2s.

But if they're shooting less than 33.33...%, like 33.32% or less, then that is a not as good as 50% from 2 while 33.34% would be better. If you want to go into that detail to differentiate between shooters between 33% and 34%, the fractional numbers after the decimal point actually matter.

3 * 33.33% = 2 * 50%

For practical purposes, just saying that shooting 33% from 3 is as good as shooting 50% from 2 is close enough to true that most people don't bother with the fractional numbers.

[lillurk]

1 minute ago, Trish said:

Indiana hired an NBA coach who doesn’t believe in the 3PT shot.

While I agree with you that IU should’ve shot more 3s, should shoot more going forward, and that Woody’s public comments on this haven’t been helpful, his 2012-2013 Knicks led the league in 3s attempted:

 https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/NYK/2013.html

He hasn’t adapted as the rest of the league has caught and passed that pace, though college is behind the NBA in this regard on average.

Not defending last season at all. I wish he’d adapted earlier, been less stubborn, seen what we all saw last offseason. But my hunch is he is fine with good shooters shooting whenever they want (think of Mgbako, senior Kopp, Parker Stewart, even JHS, who’s closer to average shooting than these guys).

Now, the scheme needs to focus on that too. But if IU has 3 or more guards who can drive and kick, play PNR well? There will be open looks.

[lillurk]

4 minutes ago, go iu bb said:

People often shorten 33 1/3% to 33%. So it works out like this: The shooter has hit 33 out 99 shots for 99 points. The last shot goes in 1 out of 3 times, so on average, they'll get 100 points.

So 33.333....%  from 3 is the same effective field goal percentage as 50% on 2s.

But if they're shooting less than 33.33...%, like 33.32% or less, then that is a not as good as 50% from 2 while 33.34% would be better. If you want to go into that detail to differentiate between shooters between 33% and 34%, the fractional numbers after the decimal point actually matter.

3 * 33.33% = 2 * 50%

For practical purposes, just saying that shooting 33% from 3 is as good as shooting 50% from 2 is close enough to true that most people don't bother with the fractional numbers.

Yeah, that’s what I meant and I’m sure @Feathery got that, I think we’re on the same page. Same’s true for 50%, since I didn’t go into decimals, maybe that’s rounded up from 49.5.

And finally, there’s the sample size issue, in one season the difference for even a high volume shooter between 30% from 3 and 34% is maybe 6-10 makes.

[HoosierHoopster]

4 hours ago, AH1971 said:

We’ve had two mainstays in the backcourt for the majority of those 3 years. Galloway and Johnson aren’t volume 3 point shooters because they aren’t 3 point shooters to begin with. Rice and Carlyle both attempted four 3pt/game as first year players, Galloway and XJ never attempted more than 3 in any of the years they played here. This isn’t hard. Woodson has shown he plays to his personnel. He bet on Xavier Johnson and got burnt. He’s going all in on young, dynamic guards who can not only create for themselves but for others. I’m willing to see that that through. It’s fine if you don’t want too, but that’s your prerogative however.

Wholeheartedly disagree, you’re just engaging in wishful thinking. 3 straight years of bottom outside shooting is scheme. No idea why you want to believe otherwise but we can stop here we’re not going to agree.

[HoosierHoopster]

4 hours ago, 8bucks said:

This is fair and I don’t expect us to launch 30 three pointers/game next year but I would be more shocked if Woody ran with the same offensive ideas this year.  I do expect some system changes and the emphasis on guards in the portal suggest this is likely. 

The plus / positive potential for me is that JHS was given a fair amount of freedom to shoot midrange (which was his game), and towards the end of this past season Bako at least was taking more outside shots. I am certainly hopeful that the portal/ recruiting reflects that Woodson will now start emphasizing the arc, I’m just not going to believe it until I see it (lol) - the numbers have a long way to go

[JF87]

Do we have a portal commitment yet?

[Feathery]

16 minutes ago, HoosierHoopster said:

The plus / positive potential for me is that JHS was given a fair amount of freedom to shoot midrange (which was his game), and towards the end of this past season Bako at least was taking more outside shots. I am certainly hopeful that the portal/ recruiting reflects that Woodson will now start emphasizing the arc, I’m just not going to believe it until I see it (lol) - the numbers have a long way to go

I think Mgbako was averaging like 4 attempts a game in conference or something like that. I could see him doing 6 a game next year. If Iu attempts 5 more 3’s a game they will be on pace with where Purdue was this year, 20ish attempts a game. To be top 100 in 3pt attempts this season I believe the number of attempts per game was around 23. (Going off the top of my head as I had previously looked this stuff up but the numbers could be off). 

[IUFAN1976]

1 hour ago, Feathery said:

ok I’ll take this one on just to be a contrarian bc I don’t necessarily disagree with you. 
 

Not to be that guy but if you took a 100 3pt shots and made 33% that’s 99 points. If you took 100 2’s and made 50% that’s 100 points. So 3*33 = 2*50% is not correct. It’s actually less than.  
 

Again not trying to be a jerk but the magic number is 34% from 3 is better than 50% from 2. But when you have a quality post like TJD or and Edey shooting 58%/62% from 2 then to value the 3 point line a shooter would need to shoot 38.6% and 41.3% from 3 respectively. 
 

Malik Reneau shot 55.8% from 2, meaning an IU shooter needs to shoot it 37.2% from 3 to break even. Mgbako could do that but not until he got comfortable. There wasn’t anyone else on the roster who could shoot it well enough, outside of Mgbako and Wade, to forgo giving it to Reneau for a 2 pt attempt. Ware shot even better at 59.9% from 2, meaning a 3pt shooter needed to shoot it at 39.9% to break even. Ware shot it from 3 well and should have shot it more and that should definitely be a criticism. 
 

So from an analytic perspective shooting more 3’s as a team wasn’t the correct answer and I didn’t believe it was during the season. Having the right guys shoot them was the correct answer but it was aware and Mgbako, then X when healthy but he was up and down do to being hurt. 

Well you are that guy, lol.  34% = 102 points so they are still not equal.  It will be closer to a 100 at 33%; however, the closest without extending your decimal places out more places is 33.4%.  33.4% is closer to 33% than 34%, just saying!  Lol

[dwtaylor1055]

Rice committed! Official!

[Kentuckysucks]