Jay Bee tweeted this during the game. I still can't quite believe it. I was hoping someone with a better understanding could explain to me how its possible.
Quote#mubb opponents shooting 74% eFG% on unguarded catch and shoots. No other BEast team allowing more than 56%.
If I'm reading this correctly, Marquette is the most unlucky team in the Big East. The only thing I can think of to explain it is that we give up more unguarded catch and shoot threes so the eFG% goes up.
I feel like I read this in a post earlier today. Am I crazy?
Quote from: #UnleashRowsey on February 11, 2017, 11:56:55 PM
I feel like I read this in a post earlier today. Am I crazy?
You did. I posted it in the game thread. But I think it got lost in PFs and Sand Knits back and forth.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on February 11, 2017, 11:59:23 PM
You did. I posted it in the game thread. But I think it got lost in PFs and Sand Knits back and forth.
Wish those two would get banned. Theres a huge difference between pointing out a flaw, and hammering a guy for anything.
As for the stat, I wonder how much of it has to do with Marquette leaving people open way more then other teams.
Quote from: #UnleashRowsey on February 12, 2017, 12:03:41 AM
Wish those two would get banned. Theres a huge difference between pointing out a flaw, and hammering a guy for anything.
As for the stat, I wonder how much of it has to do with Marquette leaving people open way more then other teams.
This☝️☝☝☝
What is considered open against most teams is a step against MU no one is within 10 feet and you had the opportunity to get ur feet set n step into ur shot. Or today most of the wide open shots were actually dunks.
Quote from: #UnleashRowsey on February 12, 2017, 12:03:41 AM
Wish those two would get banned. Theres a huge difference between pointing out a flaw, and hammering a guy for anything.
As for the stat, I wonder how much of it has to do with Marquette leaving people open way more then other teams.
Quote from: Mr. Sand-Knit on February 12, 2017, 12:24:52 AM
This☝️☝☝☝
What is considered open against most teams is a step against MU no one is within 10 feet and you had the opportunity to get ur feet set n step into ur shot. Or today most of the wide open shots were actually dunks.
The stat has nothing to do with the amount of open shots a team gets. It has everything to do with the percentage of open shots that teams make on Marquette. So regardless of the number of those shots Marquette is giving up, our opponents are making those shots at a much higher clip against us than any other Big East team is having their opponents make the same shot against them.
Quote from: wadesworld on February 12, 2017, 12:29:32 AM
The stat has nothing to do with the amount of open shots a team gets. It has everything to do with the percentage of open shots that teams make on Marquette. So regardless of the number of those shots Marquette is giving up, our opponents are making those shots at a much higher clip against us than any other Big East team is having their opponents make the same shot against them.
There is an average at work though. I might make 70% of wide open shots. But might only make 1/2 of them at the start. When I continue to get open shots, I may make more.
Quote from: #UnleashRowsey on February 12, 2017, 12:54:22 AM
There is an average at work though. I might make 70% of wide open shots. But might only make 1/2 of them at the start. When I continue to get open shots, I may make more.
I think there is something to this. I can't believe that is just luck.
Could it be we are leaving the wrong people open? Since it seems our defense is always on its heels, our opponent knows it can make the extra pass to one of their top shooters.
I think it's largely luck and partly the guys we have closing out impose little fright/concern into the open shooter, whereas some longer/more athletic teams/defenders would.
We actually don't give up a ridiculous amount of unguarded catch and shoot attempts compared to other teams. It's just that they make them at an absurd rate.
Quote from: wadesworld on February 12, 2017, 12:29:32 AM
The stat has nothing to do with the amount of open shots a team gets. It has everything to do with the percentage of open shots that teams make on Marquette. So regardless of the number of those shots Marquette is giving up, our opponents are making those shots at a much higher clip against us than any other Big East team is having their opponents make the same shot against them.
Yep never said anything about the number i spoke to degree of openess. U would think one could comprehend that. Smh
Quote from: Mr. Sand-Knit on February 12, 2017, 10:09:50 AM
Yep never said anything about the number i spoke to degree of openess. U would think one could comprehend that. Smh
Lol. It's unguarded catch and shoot. Unguarded. "Degree of openness" = open.
(https://mir-s3-cdn-cf.behance.net/project_modules/disp/87fe5119095251.5603f9309301d.jpg)
Added a little more context.... here: http://latenighthoops.com/marquettes-catch-shoot-defense-unlucky/#.WKCXAG8rLIU (http://latenighthoops.com/marquettes-catch-shoot-defense-unlucky/#.WKCXAG8rLIU)
It's not luck. It's because they are SOOOOOO open. When Fish goes out and chases a guard, someone, usually JJJ (careless) or Hauser (slow) needs to collapse to the middle and leaves an opposing man open in the corner. Opposing teams see this (now they know it and scheme for it) and get an open 3. Hauser is too slow to close out and JJJ doesn't really try. It is 100% Fisher's fault, or it's WOJO's fault if he's telling fisher to chase for so long.
What I'd like to see is this stat for Heldt's time vs. Fisher because Heldt recovers much faster to the center, allowing the help man to move back to position.
There is not one other big east center chasing guards over picks like fisher is. Why? Because it doesn't work.
Quote from: WarriorFan on February 12, 2017, 02:15:53 PM
It's not luck. It's because they are SOOOOOO open. When Fish goes out and chases a guard, someone, usually JJJ (careless) or Hauser (slow) needs to collapse to the middle and leaves an opposing man open in the corner. Opposing teams see this (now they know it and scheme for it) and get an open 3. Hauser is too slow to close out and JJJ doesn't really try. It is 100% Fisher's fault, or it's WOJO's fault if he's telling fisher to chase for so long.
What I'd like to see is this stat for Heldt's time vs. Fisher because Heldt recovers much faster to the center, allowing the help man to move back to position.
There is not one other big east center chasing guards over picks like fisher is. Why? Because it doesn't work.
Again the stat is unguarded catch and shoots. Nobody is near the shooter. I think Jay Bee is correct that because of our lack of length we need to get even closer than most teams on close outs to disrupt the shot. But a lot of it is luck as well. Can you imagine how high that number would be without the Nova game? They couldn't hit the broadside of a barn.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on February 12, 2017, 02:50:20 PM
Again the stat is unguarded catch and shoots. Nobody is near the shooter. I think Jay Bee is correct that because of our lack of length we need to get even closer than most teams on close outs to disrupt the shot. But a lot of it is luck as well. Can you imagine how high that number would be without the Nova game? They couldn't hit the broadside of a barn.
Wouldn't getting closer on close outs to disrupt the shot result in reducing the quantity of catch and shoots that are qualified as "unguarded"?
Quote from: g0lden3agle on February 12, 2017, 05:10:48 PM
Wouldn't getting closer on close outs to disrupt the shot result in reducing the quantity of catch and shoots that are qualified as "unguarded"?
Sure, but every team in the country gives up unguarded catch and shoots. Even the best defensive team will allow some. You want to limit them, but they'll still happen.
Quote from: WarriorFan on February 12, 2017, 02:15:53 PM
It's not luck. It's because they are SOOOOOO open. When Fish goes out and chases a guard, someone, usually JJJ (careless) or Hauser (slow) needs to collapse to the middle and leaves an opposing man open in the corner. Opposing teams see this (now they know it and scheme for it) and get an open 3. Hauser is too slow to close out and JJJ doesn't really try. It is 100% Fisher's fault, or it's WOJO's fault if he's telling fisher to chase for so long.
What I'd like to see is this stat for Heldt's time vs. Fisher because Heldt recovers much faster to the center, allowing the help man to move back to position.
There is not one other big east center chasing guards over picks like fisher is. Why? Because it doesn't work.
So you are saying JJ is careless and doesn't try? OK
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 12, 2017, 05:14:34 PM
Sure, but every team in the country gives up unguarded catch and shoots. Even the best defensive team will allow some. You want to limit them, but they'll still happen.
Right, I guess my point was that a more effective close out should move catch and shoots from "unguarded" to "guarded", and thus have no impact on the eFG% of "unguarded" catch and shoots (at least based on my current understanding of what an "unguarded" catch and shoot is).
Quote from: g0lden3agle on February 12, 2017, 06:08:32 PM
Right, I guess my point was that a more effective close out should move catch and shoots from "unguarded" to "guarded", and thus have no impact on the eFG% of "unguarded" catch and shoots (at least based on my current understand of what an "unguarded" catch and shoot is).
Tried to make it clear, but we're good in that regard
Quote from: Jay Bee on February 12, 2017, 06:31:19 PM
Tried to make it clear, but we're good in that regard
"we're good in that regard" means the quantity is not concerning (based on first bullet point in "Other..."), right? I get that part but what I'm still confused by is people suggesting that better close-outs would result in lowering this specific eFG% metric. As you explained in the article isn't the only explanation (other than that this is an entirely luck based phenomenon) is that the opponent might be feeling good about themselves or more comfortable when they're playing us?
Quote from: g0lden3agle on February 12, 2017, 06:48:29 PM
"we're good in that regard" means the quantity is not concerning (based on first bullet point in "Other..."), right? I get that part but what I'm still confused by is people suggesting that better close-outs would result in lowering this specific eFG% metric. As you explained in the article isn't the only explanation (other than that this is an entirely luck based phenomenon) is that the opponent might be feeling good about themselves or more comfortable when they're playing us?
My point was that if you are a shooter and are unguarded buy see a 6"8 guy running to close out on the shot, you might be more worried than if 5"11 Andrew Rowsey is running to close out on you. I don't mean that the defender is going to block it, just psychologically a shooter might rush a shot if they see a shot blocker coming their direction.
Quote from: #UnleashRowsey on February 12, 2017, 12:03:41 AM
Wish those two would get banned. Theres a huge difference between pointing out a flaw, and hammering a guy for anything.
As for the stat, I wonder how much of it has to do with Marquette leaving people open way more then other teams.
I don't hammer "a guy" idiot.
I point out poor play.
Whether it's JJJ or Katin or Sam.
Good lord
Quote from: PFsHeroes32 on February 12, 2017, 08:09:24 PM
I don't hammer "a guy" idiot.
I point out poor play.
Whether it's JJJ or Katin or Sam.
Good lord
Point out bad play is "Luke missed a dunk."
Hammer a guy is "WTF is Luke doing??"
You can do what you want, but delivery does matter. If you change how you say things, people won't react in that way. Its pretty simple.
Unguarded catch and shoot effectively means anything from a layup to a no dribble shot off a pass. Essentially the stat is saying that MU gives up more uncontested shots i.e. layups, predominantly, (because those are higher percentage shots) than their Big East opponents. It's a cherry picker stat that I don't necessarily like because it takes into account inside and outside shots, lumping them together. Many factors can contribute to this such as turnovers, slow defense, etc. It's not precise by any means. Nonetheless, a 20% difference is huge and warrants further breakdown into "sub stats" to give a clearer picture.
Of course, I can give you the eye test and MU gives up some very easy baskets down low around 3 or more per game, where everyone is standing around looking at each other, unaware of where the help is supposed to be.
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 12, 2017, 11:23:10 PM
Unguarded catch and shoot effectively means anything from a layup to a no dribble shot off a pass. Essentially the stat is saying that MU gives up more uncontested shots i.e. layups, predominantly, (because those are higher percentage shots) than their Big East opponents. It's a cherry picker stat that I don't necessarily like because it takes into account inside and outside shots, lumping them together. Many factors can contribute to this such as turnovers, slow defense, etc. It's not precise by any means. Nonetheless, a 20% difference is huge and warrants further breakdown into "sub stats" to give a clearer picture.
Of course, I can give you the eye test and MU gives up some very easy baskets down low around 3 or more per game, where everyone is standing around looking at each other, unaware of where the help is supposed to be.
Did you read the article?
The vast majority of these are NOT layups. They are three point shots.
They are also "catch and shoots" which means the player receives the pass and immediately shoots. No dribble, pump fake, or any other basketball move. Just an immediate release. To be honest, I don't know that layups are considered in this at all. If they were, it would have to be a situation where a player received a pass next to the hoop and immediately went up without taking a dribble....and having no defender anywhere near him. I think that number is actually pretty small.
Also in the article, Marquette actually gives up less unguarded catch and shoots than most teams. Their opponents just hit them at an absurdly high rate.
I didn't see the article. If you're justifying that other teams just seem to "stroke" the ball against MU, I'd say you're full of it. Call it what it is.....poor perimeter defense or just overall piss poor defense. Wojo is quickly becoming the worst defensive coach in MU history.
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 12, 2017, 11:45:34 PM
I didn't see the article. If you're justifying that other teams just seem to "stroke" the ball against MU, I'd say you're full of it. Call it what it is.....poor perimeter defense or just overall piss poor defense. Wojo is quickly becoming the worst defensive coach in MU history.
We do have a piss poor defense. As the article says, this stat only accounts for maybe 1.5 points per game. There's still a lot going wrong with our defense outside of this. But it is an interesting stat. We are talking about unguarded shots. Our defense has nothing to do with it. It is all about the opponent hitting open shots. As I've previously stated, I think some of it is our lack of the length makes it harder to intimidate shooters. Some of it might be that we give up more open threes than open twos so that would inflate the eFG%. But I do think that some of it is luck. You can't have the big of a discrepancy without luck being somewhat of a factor.
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 12, 2017, 11:23:10 PM
Unguarded catch and shoot effectively means anything from a layup to a no dribble shot off a pass. Essentially the stat is saying that MU gives up more uncontested shots i.e. layups, predominantly, (because those are higher percentage shots) than their Big East opponents. It's a cherry picker stat that I don't necessarily like because it takes into account inside and outside shots, lumping them together. Many factors can contribute to this such as turnovers, slow defense, etc. It's not precise by any means. Nonetheless, a 20% difference is huge and warrants further breakdown into "sub stats" to give a clearer picture.
Of course, I can give you the eye test and MU gives up some very easy baskets down low around 3 or more per game, where everyone is standing around looking at each other, unaware of where the help is supposed to be.
Jump shots only. Almost all 3-pointers
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 12, 2017, 11:23:10 PM
Unguarded catch and shoot effectively means anything from a layup to a no dribble shot off a pass. Essentially the stat is saying that MU gives up more uncontested shots i.e. layups, predominantly, (because those are higher percentage shots) than their Big East opponents. It's a cherry picker stat that I don't necessarily like because it takes into account inside and outside shots, lumping them together. Many factors can contribute to this such as turnovers, slow defense, etc. It's not precise by any means. Nonetheless, a 20% difference is huge and warrants further breakdown into "sub stats" to give a clearer picture.
Of course, I can give you the eye test and MU gives up some very easy baskets down low around 3 or more per game, where everyone is standing around looking at each other, unaware of where the help is supposed to be.
Lol. I love when people throw out totally incorrect information on a situation that they couldn't even be bothered to read the information on which the situation is based. Good stuff.
LoL, I was doing some work and didn't see the article. Nonetheless, main point suffices that MU's defense among worst ever in the program.
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 13, 2017, 11:40:40 AM
LoL, I was doing some work and didn't see the article. Nonetheless, main point suffices that MU's defense among worst ever in the program.
You're correct. But that doesn't address the topic at hand. Stop lobbing grenades blindly.
Lobbing grenades!!! My oh my we are a sensitive bunch especially over a nitpicking stat that is meaningless in the scheme of things. If you haven't had your ovaltine, though, today - I will forgive you.
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 13, 2017, 11:58:54 AM
Lobbing grenades!!! My oh my we are a sensitive bunch especially over a nitpicking stat that is meaningless in the scheme of things. If you haven't had your ovaltine, though, today - I will forgive you.
Pretty sure we've established that eFG% is kind of a big deal. And certainly not "meaningless" as you put it.
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 13, 2017, 11:58:54 AM
Lobbing grenades!!! My oh my we are a sensitive bunch especially over a nitpicking stat that is meaningless in the scheme of things. If you haven't had your ovaltine, though, today - I will forgive you.
Points scored is meaningless? Interesting viewpoint
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 13, 2017, 11:58:54 AM
Lobbing grenades!!! My oh my we are a sensitive bunch especially over a nitpicking stat that is meaningless in the scheme of things. If you haven't had your ovaltine, though, today - I will forgive you.
Because FG% doesn't matter at all
I enjoy how eFG% has now morphed into FG%. I feel like I'm being assaulted by a bunch of guys with TI 83 calculators.
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 13, 2017, 12:34:04 PM
I enjoy how eFG% has now morphed into FG%. I feel like I'm being assaulted by a bunch of guys with TI 83 calculators.
Amazing take. Ners would be proud.
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 13, 2017, 12:34:04 PM
I enjoy how eFG% has now morphed into FG%. I feel like I'm being assaulted by a bunch of guys with TI 83 calculators.
You need to really calm down i forgot the e? Kill me now i forgot the e
Quote from: GoldenEagles32 on February 13, 2017, 12:39:42 PM
You need to really calm down i forgot the e? Kill me now i forgot the e
Misinformation changes the course of history. Remember the lesson.
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 13, 2017, 12:41:13 PM
Misinformation changes the course of history. Remember the lesson.
Is the lesson that you're still wrong in your stance on this thread?
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 13, 2017, 12:34:04 PM
I enjoy how eFG% has now morphed into FG%. I feel like I'm being assaulted by a bunch of guys with TI 83 calculators.
And God forbid we ever listen to those stating informed opinions with those calculators rather than those shooting from the hip and lobbing grenades.
Based on how I understand that stat, one of two things is probably true:
1. MU has been unlucky
2. We are leaving the wrong guys open
Probably a little of both.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on February 12, 2017, 11:03:17 PM
Point out bad play is "Luke missed a dunk."
Hammer a guy is "WTF is Luke doing??"
You can do what you want, but delivery does matter. If you change how you say things, people won't react in that way. Its pretty simple.
Uhhh considering Luke missed a layup, dunk and open hook shot. Yeah, wtf is luke doing is less words and just as effective.
You that sensitive? That's poor delivery?
How did you survive to this point? We're you constantly seeking counseling? Do you leave the house?
I genuinely would like to you know. If you consider "wtf is luke doing" any sort of over the top
Quote from: jesmu84 on February 13, 2017, 01:01:24 PM
Is the lesson that you're still wrong in your stance on this thread?
Wrong that defense is very poor on this team? No, I'm not wrong especially when there are those trying to play the "MU is unlucky" card which is pathetic.
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 13, 2017, 02:29:36 PM
Wrong that defense is very poor on this team? No, I'm not wrong especially when there are those trying to play the "MU is unlucky" card which is pathetic.
This very thread is self-aware that what it has identified as a heavily luck based statistic only impacts the defensive efficiency to the tune of roughly 1.5 ppg. No one here is trying to claim this was some earth shattering revelation that nothing about out defensive game plan is leading to poor defensive efficiency.
Carry on, sir.
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 13, 2017, 02:29:36 PM
Wrong that defense is very poor on this team? No, I'm not wrong especially when there are those trying to play the "MU is unlucky" card which is pathetic.
Incorrect. Try again.
Quote from: PFsHeroes32 on February 13, 2017, 02:26:53 PM
Uhhh considering Luke missed a layup, dunk and open hook shot. Yeah, wtf is luke doing is less words and just as effective.
You that sensitive? That's poor delivery?
How did you survive to this point? We're you constantly seeking counseling? Do you leave the house?
I genuinely would like to you know. If you consider "wtf is luke doing" any sort of over the top
I didn't say it bothered me at all. You seemed to be confused why people are reacting to you the way they are. It rubs some people the wrong way when grown men attack 18-22 year olds who are playing a game for their enjoyment. Others it doesn't. You can't control how people react to you. All you can control is what you do. So if it bothers you that people are treating you this way, you can either change your delivery or you can deal with it. I don't care either way.
(http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/leo-decaprio-shoulder-shrug.gif)
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 13, 2017, 02:29:36 PM
Wrong that defense is very poor on this team? No, I'm not wrong especially when there are those trying to play the "MU is unlucky" card which is pathetic.
Can MU's defense be very poor and unlucky? I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. In fact, to be as bad as we are, there probably has to be elements of both.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on February 13, 2017, 05:25:59 PM
Can MU's defense be very poor and unlucky? I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. In fact, to be as bad as we are, there probably has to be elements of both.
I know the team prepares a defense for each opponent, and but there are games where I swear whatever the players have been told about an opponent's tendencies go out the window. Do we ever force teams into doing what WE want them to do?
Quote from: ecompt on February 13, 2017, 05:38:26 PM
I know the team prepares a defense for each opponent, and but there are games where I swear whatever the players have been told about an opponent's tendencies go out the window. Do we ever force teams into doing what WE want them to do?
Opponents salivate when they play MU. Bench players thrive even more knowing they have a good shot at scoring in double digits. Confidence, I'm sure, plays a role.
How about this......if we had average luck.....our defense would be less poor.
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 13, 2017, 08:06:22 PM
Opponents salivate when they play MU. Bench players thrive even more knowing they have a good shot at scoring in double digits. Confidence, I'm sure, plays a role.
Agreed. Also once a player starts making shots, their confidence goes us against a trash MU defense
Quote from: MuMark on February 13, 2017, 09:55:13 PM
How about this......if we had average luck.....our defense would be less poor.
No. Luck has nothing to do with it. Coaching does.
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 13, 2017, 10:44:30 PM
No. Luck has nothing to do with it. Coaching does.
Nothing is a strong word. That implies that there is no luck in basketball, which simply isn't true. However, good coaching can overcome bad luck 9 times out of 10.
This thread wasn't meant to excuse the defense. The defense is piss poor. It was just noting a weird statistical anomaly. To be in last in conference by 18% in any stat is an oddity. For one so heavily based on luck, it is even weirder.
Quote from: MikeDeanesDarkGlasses on February 13, 2017, 10:44:30 PM
No. Luck has nothing to do with it. Coaching does.
Incorrect, again. My god. Read the article. Use some logic.
You have good points you make elsewhere. Here, not so much
Instead of luck, substitute the words "high variance". There are probably 12-20 threes attempted per game (reduced denominator) and they count for 150% of the points (increased numerator).
Just from scanning the chart JB posted in his article, I'd guess MU is probably 2+ standard deviations from the rest of the league in this aspect of defense. While MU's defense is bad, that shouldn't justify 2+ standard deviations of results from a pretty specific situation.
Remember that a team has very little control over how many threes an opponent makes. The opponent's offense is in control of that.
If a team plays good man-to-man defense, there will be very few wide open catch-and-shoot opportunities when the opposing team is in a half-court set.
Quote from: Badgerhater on February 14, 2017, 09:54:43 AM
If a team plays good man-to-man defense, there will be very few wide open catch-and-shoot opportunities when the opposing team is in a half-court set.
Again, that's not the point of this statistic. It isn't the number of open shots they are giving up. It is the rate of open shots the other team is making. As Sugar points out, if this were a slight variance, you could probably attribute it to poor defense. But two standard deviations? That's pretty remarkable.
Quote from: Badgerhater on February 14, 2017, 09:54:43 AM
If a team plays good man-to-man defense, there will be very few wide open catch-and-shoot opportunities when the opposing team is in a half-court set.
As Jay bee pointed out, we actually don't give up very many unguarded catch and shoots. Our opponents just make them at an absurd rate
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on February 13, 2017, 05:24:32 PM
...It rubs some people the wrong way when grown men attack 17-22 year olds who are playing a game for their enjoyment. Others it doesn't. You can't control how people react to you. All you can control is what you do. So if it bothers you that people are treating you this way, you can either change your delivery or you can deal with it. I don't care either way.
Fixed.
Drink.
And agreed.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on February 14, 2017, 10:14:16 AM
As Jay bee pointed out, we actually don't give up very many unguarded catch and shoots. Our opponents just make them at an absurd rate
It doesn't take too many times to kill you if the wrong player is left wide open. Which players are getting the catch and shoots? It is not a team's worst shooters, it appears to be the players who are outstanding shooters....the very people who should not be left wide open when playing man-to-man defense in the half court.
Now teams do run plays to get their Steve Novak types a wide open shot, but good defensive teams don't let that type of player be that open very often.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on February 13, 2017, 05:24:32 PM
I didn't say it bothered me at all. You seemed to be confused why people are reacting to you the way they are. It rubs some people the wrong way when grown men attack 18-22 year olds who are playing a game for their enjoyment. Others it doesn't. You can't control how people react to you. All you can control is what you do. So if it bothers you that people are treating you this way, you can either change your delivery or you can deal with it. I don't care either way.
(http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/leo-decaprio-shoulder-shrug.gif)
The only people that seem to be bothered are people like yourself
Who ironically "whine" about "whining" when I'm not even whining.
Saying "wtf is luke doing" isn't "attacking a man" it's asking a question. This cannot be argued.
If I said "luke fishcher is a worthless piece of crap who sucks ass at basketball" that would be attacking.
I don't have an agenda like some and go after players. I don't dislike any 1 player on this team. I was actually one of the only sane people to not just pile on Katin for a poor start.
I point garbage play by the team. It's always accurate, not my fault on a sports discussion forum some people only want to hear positives.
And btw, luke is a grown man. So even if I did "attack" it's not weird.
Quote from: Badgerhater on February 14, 2017, 11:10:39 AM
It doesn't take too many times to kill you if the wrong player is left wide open. Which players are getting the catch and shoots? It is not a team's worst shooters, it appears to be the players who are outstanding shooters....the very people who should not be left wide open when playing man-to-man defense in the half court.
Now teams do run plays to get their Steve Novak types a wide open shot, but good defensive teams don't let that type of player be that open very often.
Except it is not the best shooters or their "Steve Novak" type it is happening way over the average by players that do not even shoot the 3 very well. My guess is knowing that no one over 6'-4" is coming to contest the shot might give some confidence. Don't know but it mis a real incredible stat.
Quote from: Newsdrms on February 14, 2017, 01:27:58 PM
Except it is not the best shooters or their "Steve Novak" type it is happening way over the average by players that do not even shoot the 3 very well. My guess is knowing that no one over 6'-4" is coming to contest the shot might give some confidence. Don't know but it mis a real incredible stat.
I think that describes what might be occurring better than anything. Along with a little luck.
http://www.si.com/more-sports/2012/05/14/defending-three
Quote from: PFsHeroes32 on February 14, 2017, 11:37:34 AM
The only people that seem to be bothered are people like yourself
Who ironically "whine" about "whining" when I'm not even whining.
Saying "wtf is luke doing" isn't "attacking a man" it's asking a question. This cannot be argued.
If I said "luke fishcher is a worthless piece of crap who sucks ass at basketball" that would be attacking.
I don't have an agenda like some and go after players. I don't dislike any 1 player on this team. I was actually one of the only sane people to not just pile on Katin for a poor start.
I point garbage play by the team. It's always accurate, not my fault on a sports discussion forum some people only want to hear positives.
And btw, luke is a grown man. So even if I did "attack" it's not weird.
First off, we all know that you aren't a grown man until you're 40.
Again, didn't bother me in the slightest. You seemed genuinely confused why some people were rubbed the wrong way by the game thread. I don't think its that they only want to hear positives. I think some people interpret "WTF is he doing" as angry yelling, not as pointing out bad play. That bothers some people. Others it doesn't. Really, who t f cares we're just a bunch of nerds who care way too much about college basketball.
Quote from: Badgerhater on February 14, 2017, 11:10:39 AM
It doesn't take too many times to kill you if the wrong player is left wide open. Which players are getting the catch and shoots? It is not a team's worst shooters, it appears to be the players who are outstanding shooters....the very people who should not be left wide open when playing man-to-man defense in the half court.
Now teams do run plays to get their Steve Novak types a wide open shot, but good defensive teams don't let that type of player be that open very often.
I have wondered if that was a factor. Just leaving the wrong person open. Could be. I really don't have the ability to look up which specific players were left open. Still, I don't know if that accounts for us being 2 standard deviations away from the rest of the BE in this stat.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on February 14, 2017, 02:43:33 PM
First off, we all know that you aren't a grown man until you're 40.
Again, didn't bother me in the slightest. You seemed genuinely confused why some people were rubbed the wrong way by the game thread. I don't think its that they only want to hear positives. I think some people interpret "WTF is he doing" as angry yelling, not as pointing out bad play. That bothers some people. Others it doesn't. Really, who t f cares we're just a bunch of nerds who care way too much about college basketball.
Well to be fair
He said that me and sandknit "hammer a guy for anything"
Lumping me in with that guy's crazed obsession with hammering Luke/JJJ
I hammer the whole team equally on poor play. And immediately praise good play as well.
So ultimately it's less how my anger is interpreted. And more so his complete cluelessness on the different between me and Sandknit(whom I ironically got pissed 2 games ago because I praised Luke).
Just point out to unleash he's an idiot. Can't properly call someone out
Quote from: PFsHeroes32 on February 14, 2017, 03:12:24 PM
Well to be fair
He said that me and sandknit "hammer a guy for anything"
Lumping me in with that guy's crazed obsession with hammering Luke/JJJ
I hammer the whole team equally on poor play. And immediately praise good play as well.
So ultimately it's less how my anger is interpreted. And more so his complete cluelessness on the different between me and Sandknit(whom I ironically got pissed 2 games ago because I praised Luke).
Just point out to unleash he's an idiot. Can't properly call someone out
That's fair. Probably some guilt by association there. It seemed like there was a good two pages in there where you and Sand Knit were the only posters.