MUScoop

MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: HoopsterBC on August 20, 2015, 01:11:10 PM

Title: Luke Fischer
Post by: HoopsterBC on August 20, 2015, 01:11:10 PM
After watching the 4 games overseas,  I am wondering if Wojo is doing any favors with Luke to improve his game.  Is it off limits for him to step outside and shoot
the 15 footer?  It would make him a better player and an NBA player, am I missing something here?  He never fronts the rim, always having his back to the basket?
Shoots free throws pretty good?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: CAGASS24 on August 20, 2015, 01:16:22 PM
eh - he makes a good number of free throws but watch how he shoots them - great big knee bend and ackward arm position - if he could make shots like you want he'd have just a more subtle wrist flick shot and more stationary lower body -
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: HoopsterBC on August 20, 2015, 01:26:20 PM
Still would give him more ability to score from different areas on the court, be more that a 1 trick pony.  Better teams will stop him down low.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: avid1010 on August 20, 2015, 01:48:07 PM
After watching the 4 games overseas,  I am wondering if Wojo is doing any favors with Luke to improve his game.  Is it off limits for him to step outside and shoot
the 15 footer?  It would make him a better player and an NBA player, am I missing something here?  He never fronts the rim, always having his back to the basket?
Shoots free throws pretty good?
i heard wojo didn't want luke to improve his game...so he has told him no face up jumpers...won't even let him practice his shot to earn the right to take them in a game. 
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: PGsHeroes32 on August 20, 2015, 01:50:17 PM
i heard wojo didn't want luke to improve his game...so he has told him no face up jumpers...won't even let him practice his shot to earn the right to take them in a game.

Yeah, wojo has supposedly said many times he doesn't want Luke having any chance to leave early so he's saving the jumper for next year.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 20, 2015, 04:12:44 PM
i heard wojo didn't want luke to improve his game...so he has told him no face up jumpers...won't even let him practice his shot to earn the right to take them in a game.

It's Wojo's forte.  Play mind games with the guys.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: keefe on August 20, 2015, 05:35:53 PM
One of the big reasons Wojo is insisting on a drug-free team culture is to eliminate a reason for Luke to leave Marquette early
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: manny31 on August 20, 2015, 09:03:18 PM
One of the big reasons Wojo is insisting on a drug-free team culture is to eliminate a reason for Luke to leave Marquette early
[/quote
Nice work.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: The Lens on August 21, 2015, 09:10:27 AM
It is amazing, Luke found the situation in Bloomington so squirmy that he transferred to Buzz U.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on August 21, 2015, 09:31:12 AM
It is amazing, Luke found the situation in Bloomington so squirmy that he transferred to Buzz U.

Correction....he was homesick which is why all his schools he looked at transfering to were very close to home or had small settings.

UWM
MU
Creighton

He was not upset one iota that Buzz is gone.  In fact, he believes he is in a better situation and couldn't have worked out better with the Buzzard gone.  You can verify that within the department if you wish.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 21, 2015, 09:40:36 AM
Correction....he was homesick which is why all his schools he looked at transfering to were very close to home or had small settings.

UWM
MU
Creighton

He was not upset one iota that Buzz is gone.  In fact, he believes he is in a better situation and couldn't have worked out better with the Buzzard gone.  You can verify that within the department if you wish.

Wait, Creighton is close to home?  Bloomington is bigger than Omaha?  Jeeze, here I thought the 5 hour 40 minute drive from Germantown to Bloomington was shorter than the 8 hour drive from Germantown to Omaha and that Omaha's population of 435,000+ people was more than Bloomington's population of 83,000.  Silly me.

Shocking that Chicos would go out of his way to make himself look foolish in an attempt to save face for Crean.

Also shocking that a 19 year old college basketball player wouldn't come out and say, "I am not comfortable with the rampant drug use and lack of accountability within the basketball program so I am looking to transfer."

 :o
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on August 21, 2015, 09:43:49 AM
Apparently the conjunction OR is not understood by you


https://www.youtube.com/v/RPoBE-E8VOc
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MUchamp22 on August 21, 2015, 09:46:17 AM
Wait, Creighton is close to home?  Bloomington is bigger than Omaha?  Jeeze, here I thought the 5 hour 40 minute drive from Germantown to Bloomington was shorter than the 8 hour drive from Germantown to Omaha and that Omaha's population of 435,000+ people was more than Bloomington's population of 83,000.  Silly me.

I believe he meant school sizes.... Like student population
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: avid1010 on August 21, 2015, 09:47:50 AM
Correction....he was homesick which is why all his schools he looked at transfering to were very close to home or had small settings.

UWM
MU
Creighton

He was not upset one iota that Buzz is gone.  In fact, he believes he is in a better situation and couldn't have worked out better with the Buzzard gone.  You can verify that within the department if you wish.

can verify with the family that you are incorrect on the schools listed.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 21, 2015, 10:12:12 AM
Apparently the conjunction OR is not understood by you

So he was fine driving a long way, as long as the student population was under 15,000, but if it was around 30,000, then he had to be close to home, is what you're saying?

Or maybe he just wanted some structure around the program he was playing in.  A clean program.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: The Lens on August 21, 2015, 01:52:43 PM

He was not upset one iota that Buzz is gone.  In fact, he believes he is in a better situation and couldn't have worked out better with the Buzzard gone.  You can verify that within the department if you wish.


When I do verify this with people within the department will they tell me the all squirmy Buzz things, too?  It would be fun to learn before the FBI & NCAA come crashing in - as I'm sure that will happen eventually.

Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on August 22, 2015, 12:14:25 PM
I think it is sad people imply Luke is a liar, over and over again.  That's a shame.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 22, 2015, 12:34:24 PM
I think it is sad people imply Luke is a liar, over and over again.  That's a shame.

Lol

Nice dodge. Par for the course.

Not one person said Luke was a liar, not once. I would've been homesick as well, if all everyone I was around did was do drugs and drink while I was in college and the person who was supposed to hold them accountable did nothing about it until an 18 year old decided to drink and then got behind the wheel of a car and ran over one of my teammates. But maybe that's just me.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on August 22, 2015, 01:40:26 PM
So he was fine driving a long way, as long as the student population was under 15,000, but if it was around 30,000, then he had to be close to home, is what you're saying?

Or maybe he just wanted some structure around the program he was playing in.  A clean program.


https://www.youtube.com/v/RPoBE-E8VOc

Thankfully for all involved, Buzz is gone, Luke is at MU, close to home, close to family.  Worked out well for everyone.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: NickelDimer on August 22, 2015, 02:36:42 PM
It is amazing, Luke found the situation in Bloomington so squirmy that he transferred to Buzz U.
This was like sprinkling the lawn when you need nightcrawlers
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: BallBoy on August 22, 2015, 03:48:11 PM
can verify with the family that you are incorrect on the schools listed.

Google Luke Fischer transfer. Those are the three schools listed. He is even quoted as saying he wouldn't transfer to the Big ten out of respect for Crean.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Dawson Rental on August 22, 2015, 03:49:51 PM
After watching the 4 games overseas,  I am wondering if Wojo is doing any favors with Luke to improve his game.  Is it off limits for him to step outside and shoot
the 15 footer?  It would make him a better player and an NBA player, am I missing something here?  He never fronts the rim, always having his back to the basket?
Shoots free throws pretty good?

So, Marquette gets it's first legitimate inside presence in almost two decades and you want to move him to the perimeter?  That's taking contrarian thinking a little too far for me.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: avid1010 on August 22, 2015, 05:09:46 PM
I think it is sad people imply Luke is a liar, over and over again.  That's a shame.
i don't care to name drop (because you do enough of that for the entire board)...but you're full of it. 
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: brandx on August 22, 2015, 08:35:05 PM
Maybe Luke called chico's wife a liar.

Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on August 22, 2015, 09:48:48 PM
So, Marquette gets it's first legitimate inside presence in almost two decades and you want to move him to the perimeter?  That's taking contrarian thinking a little too far for me.

its vs. it's
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on August 23, 2015, 11:30:39 AM
i don't care to name drop (because you do enough of that for the entire board)...but you're full of it.

It's a crying shame that the young man has said over and over again why he transferred and MU fans call him a liar.  That is a shame.  Very sad.  Do I think things were going on at IU that made it very difficult on him?  Absolutely, in fact heard some of that directly from peeps at MU and IU.  Was a big part of that also being homesick, smaller situation, etc?  Yes. 

I thought we would be better than to insinuate the kid is a liar.  I'm taking him at his word, the rest of you can do what you wish in your anti coach screeds.  When I read stuff here where people say homesickness had NOTHING to do with it....it disgusts me.  Because people are calling him a liar.  Shameful.

"Part of the reason I came back was to play for a team in Wisconsin, to play for a team I grew up cheering for," Fischer said. "After I left (the state of Wisconsin) I didn't understand why I didn't stay home."

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/goldeneagles/homesickness-brought-germantowns-luke-fischer-to-marquette-b99184125z1-240191061.html

http://www.crimsonquarry.com/2013/12/30/5258064/luke-fischer-to-transfer-from-indiana

http://www.foxsports.com/wisconsin/story/luke-fischer-transfers-from-indiana-to-marquette-010514

http://www.bigeastcoastbias.com/2014/1/16/5312436/feature-marquette-unveils-lastest-transfer-luke-fischer

http://www.foxsports.com/wisconsin/story/luke-fischer-quickly-makes-presence-felt-for-marquette-golden-eagles-121614
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on August 23, 2015, 12:28:13 PM
I may have missed it but I don't remember anyone saying homesickness had nothing to do with Lukes transfer. They were saying the drug and alcohol culture also had something to do with it.  I think the argument is about which is the bigger motivator. Which is a dumb thing to argue about if you think about it
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 23, 2015, 12:33:52 PM
It's a crying shame that the young man has said over and over again why he transferred and MU fans call him a liar.  That is a shame.  Very sad.  Do I think things were going on at IU that made it very difficult on him?  Absolutely, in fact heard some of that directly from peeps at MU and IU.  Was a big part of that also being homesick, smaller situation, etc?  Yes. 

I thought we would be better than to insinuate the kid is a liar.  I'm taking him at his word, the rest of you can do what you wish in your anti coach screeds.  When I read stuff here where people say homesickness had NOTHING to do with it....it disgusts me.  Because people are calling him a liar.  Shameful.

"Part of the reason I came back was to play for a team in Wisconsin, to play for a team I grew up cheering for," Fischer said. "After I left (the state of Wisconsin) I didn't understand why I didn't stay home."

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/goldeneagles/homesickness-brought-germantowns-luke-fischer-to-marquette-b99184125z1-240191061.html

http://www.crimsonquarry.com/2013/12/30/5258064/luke-fischer-to-transfer-from-indiana

http://www.foxsports.com/wisconsin/story/luke-fischer-transfers-from-indiana-to-marquette-010514

http://www.bigeastcoastbias.com/2014/1/16/5312436/feature-marquette-unveils-lastest-transfer-luke-fischer

http://www.foxsports.com/wisconsin/story/luke-fischer-quickly-makes-presence-felt-for-marquette-golden-eagles-121614

It's a crying shame that you continue to put words in posters mouths and make yourself look like a fool in order to save face for your boyfriend.  That is a shame.  Very sad.  I thought we would be better than lying about what has been said here.

Once again, if there was wild and uncontrolled drug use constantly around me, I would be very uncomfortable and want to find myself a new situation.  Apparently that's what Luke felt as well.

In fact, I'll put it up here for you to dodge again, and you'll just vaguely call people out with nothing to back it up whatsoever.

Dodge, dodge, dodge, dodge.

Lol

Nice dodge. Par for the course.

Not one person said Luke was a liar, not once. I would've been homesick as well, if all everyone I was around did was do drugs and drink while I was in college and the person who was supposed to hold them accountable did nothing about it until an 18 year old decided to drink and then got behind the wheel of a car and ran over one of my teammates. But maybe that's just me.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: real chili 83 on August 23, 2015, 12:54:40 PM
There's also the Doublemint Twins.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: avid1010 on August 23, 2015, 03:53:25 PM
It's a crying shame that the young man has said over and over again why he transferred and MU fans call him a liar.  That is a shame.  Very sad.  Do I think things were going on at IU that made it very difficult on him?  Absolutely, in fact heard some of that directly from peeps at MU and IU.  Was a big part of that also being homesick, smaller situation, etc?  Yes. 

I thought we would be better than to insinuate the kid is a liar.  I'm taking him at his word, the rest of you can do what you wish in your anti coach screeds.  When I read stuff here where people say homesickness had NOTHING to do with it....it disgusts me.  Because people are calling him a liar.  Shameful.

"Part of the reason I came back was to play for a team in Wisconsin, to play for a team I grew up cheering for," Fischer said. "After I left (the state of Wisconsin) I didn't understand why I didn't stay home."

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/goldeneagles/homesickness-brought-germantowns-luke-fischer-to-marquette-b99184125z1-240191061.html

http://www.crimsonquarry.com/2013/12/30/5258064/luke-fischer-to-transfer-from-indiana

http://www.foxsports.com/wisconsin/story/luke-fischer-transfers-from-indiana-to-marquette-010514

http://www.bigeastcoastbias.com/2014/1/16/5312436/feature-marquette-unveils-lastest-transfer-luke-fischer

http://www.foxsports.com/wisconsin/story/luke-fischer-quickly-makes-presence-felt-for-marquette-golden-eagles-121614
you're too much. 
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: PuertoRicanNightmare on August 23, 2015, 08:40:01 PM
I think it is sad people imply Luke is a liar, over and over again.  That's a shame.
Luke is Hoopaloop.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MuMark on August 24, 2015, 03:51:00 PM
Beat goes on.....https://indiana.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1795332
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 24, 2015, 03:55:04 PM
Beat goes on.....https://indiana.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1795332

Crean's got that place cleaner as a whistle.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on August 24, 2015, 04:06:02 PM
lol... Mr. "no fault" Holt back at it... and the overrated Bryant enjoys the I4 rite of passage

Pinnacle!!
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on August 24, 2015, 05:41:33 PM
Chicos likes to buy his stocks on the way down.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on August 24, 2015, 05:52:41 PM
I have to admit, I did chuckle when I saw this. Only because of the timing.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: keefe on August 24, 2015, 06:45:32 PM
So, Marquette gets it's first legitimate inside presence in almost two decades and you want to move him to the perimeter?  That's taking contrarian thinking a little too far for me.

Ok, Murray. I'll bite...Tanned Tommy to Ann Arbor???
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MuMark on August 24, 2015, 07:12:37 PM
"Just win baby".......https://twitter.com/Josh_Stirn/status/635967579933274112
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: real chili 83 on August 24, 2015, 07:45:32 PM
Excise police.....they only show up when they are tipped off. Had to be a stakeout.

Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MU82 on August 24, 2015, 09:53:40 PM
Crean's got that place cleaner as a whistle.

So effen squirmy!
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on August 24, 2015, 10:07:58 PM
Bueller...Chico's....MIA

Quote
The only concern I have is that Kentucky has been to four Final Fours in five years and IU's had its sixth drug- or alcohol-related offense since 2014.

-Indiana Boards
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: brewcity77 on August 25, 2015, 07:02:34 AM
Crean needs to get Cris Carter in there to talk to these IU guys about getting a "fall guy".
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 25, 2015, 08:57:02 AM
Crean needs to get Cris Carter in there to talk to these IU guys about getting a "fall guy".

The IU Hoops Symposium.  Crean can namedrop, his players can stay off of the front page of the newspapers.  Everybody wins.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: brewcity77 on August 25, 2015, 09:05:18 AM
The IU Hoops Symposium.  Crean can namedrop, his players can stay off of the front page of the newspapers.  Everybody wins.

This is why a program like IU needs to give out as many walk-on slots as they do scholarships. That way each basketball player can have their own walk-on to crotch the booze for them. It's okay...Crean will get 'em out.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 25, 2015, 10:46:57 AM
This is why a program like IU needs to give out as many walk-on slots as they do scholarships. That way each basketball player can have their own walk-on to crotch the booze for them. It's okay...Crean will get 'em out.

Hah, good call.  The walkons are the fall guys.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 25, 2015, 10:47:32 AM
Bueller...Chico's....MIA

-Indiana Boards

He's over at Peegs saving the day.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MuMark on August 25, 2015, 12:02:18 PM
He's over at Peegs saving the day.

They are loving themselves some TC over at Peegs........How ironic that 1 poster used Chico's "just win baby" line against TC......lol
http://indiana.forums.rivals.com/threads/here-we-go-again-bryant-and-holt-cited-for-alcohol-possession.48633/
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 25, 2015, 12:12:00 PM
They are loving themselves some TC over at Peegs........How ironic that 1 poster used Chico's "just win baby" line against TC......lol
http://indiana.forums.rivals.com/threads/here-we-go-again-bryant-and-holt-cited-for-alcohol-possession.48633/

Haha wow!  They're harder on Crean over there than we are here!  This is great entertainment.

Can't wait to see TVJim's spin on this one.  "Just calling a spade a spade."
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: tower912 on August 25, 2015, 12:14:12 PM
"Hire Sampson back, at least he could coach"   

College kids drink.   This actually doesn't bother me much.   And if it weren't for TV Jim, I probably wouldn't care that it happened again at IU under Crean.    I may have to take him off ignore to see if he even tries to spin out of this one.   Based on last year, he just ignores it, won't respond, and then will come back a few months later like it didn't happen and Crean is somehow still morally superior. 
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Lennys Tap on August 25, 2015, 12:41:32 PM
My personal favorite from Peegs:

"Maybe if he ditched the tanning bed and the nerd glasses, got some properly fitting pants and didn't act like an ADD spaz after games his lousy coaching would be more tolerable."

How they love him in Bloomington. Watch out, though. He loaded this year (ranked 4th in the nation by Lindys) and has a four year starter and McDonald's AA at PG to do the coaching.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: The Lens on August 25, 2015, 12:47:06 PM
This is the best:

Hoosier Fan A:
Quote
You can't be talking to me because I never think we should win at all cost and I think any player who gets caught doing drugs or drinking should be gone

Hoosier Fan B:
Quote
But you're perfectly ok with the Sweet 16.Once you lower standards for one thing, it lowers them for all.

Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: jaygall31 on August 25, 2015, 01:38:01 PM
Maybe i'm crazy, but I think Luke's game is exactly what we want. Henry will be doing the mid range shooting, no?
Idk.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: tower912 on August 25, 2015, 07:41:06 PM
Luke's game would be better if he could consistently knock down a 12-15 ft jumper.   The mere threat of an effective jumper would make his post moves more effective.   
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Galway Eagle on August 25, 2015, 09:01:50 PM
Luke's game would be better if he could consistently knock down a 12-15 ft jumper.   The mere threat of an effective jumper would make his post moves more effective.

It's mentioned in some of the old transfer articles that he has one. I guess wojo stopped working on it?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: #UnleashSean on August 25, 2015, 09:27:32 PM
Wait, Creighton is close to home?  Bloomington is bigger than Omaha?  Jeeze, here I thought the 5 hour 40 minute drive from Germantown to Bloomington was shorter than the 8 hour drive from Germantown to Omaha and that Omaha's population of 435,000+ people was more than Bloomington's population of 83,000.  Silly me.

Shocking that Chicos would go out of his way to make himself look foolish in an attempt to save face for Crean.

Also shocking that a 19 year old college basketball player wouldn't come out and say, "I am not comfortable with the rampant drug use and lack of accountability within the basketball program so I am looking to transfer."

 :o

Creighton is smaller then IU though.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: #UnleashSean on August 25, 2015, 09:29:09 PM
So, Marquette gets it's first legitimate inside presence in almost two decades and you want to move him to the perimeter?  That's taking contrarian thinking a little too far for me.

I believe Davante Gardner would have a word with you. He destroyed everyone inside.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: rocket surgeon on August 25, 2015, 09:44:15 PM
I believe Davante Gardner would have a word with you. He destroyed everyone inside.

count the basket and...automatic...automatic...
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 25, 2015, 09:55:38 PM
Luke is a true post.  He doesn't need to develop a 15 foot jumper in the college game.  The kid shot 61% from the field last year.  He's not going to shoot 62+% from 15 and out.  That's just going to lower his efficiency.

Shaq's game wouldn't have been any better by him developing a 15 foot jumper.  Some people are best planting their butt under the rim and going to work.  That's where Luke eats.  He used to shoot (and make) 3 pointers at Germantown.  But why stand out there and shoot 30% from there when you shoot 70% under the bucket?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on August 26, 2015, 12:33:05 AM
Luke is a true post.  He doesn't need to develop a 15 foot jumper in the college game.  The kid shot 61% from the field last year.  He's not going to shoot 62+% from 15 and out.  That's just going to lower his efficiency.

Shaq's game wouldn't have been any better by him developing a 15 foot jumper.  Some people are best planting their butt under the rim and going to work.  That's where Luke eats.  He used to shoot (and make) 3 pointers at Germantown.  But why stand out there and shoot 30% from there when you shoot 70% under the bucket?

Because that 15 foot jumper adds another weapon to your arsenal that the defense has to account for. Just like a solid running game makes your passing game better in football, the ability to hit a short jumper makes your post moves more effective. Is it necessary? No. Should he take a lot of 15 foot jumpers? No. But if he has the look and can make it, it will make him a more effective post.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: THRILLHO on August 26, 2015, 05:44:10 AM
Because that 15 foot jumper adds another weapon to your arsenal that the defense has to account for. Just like a solid running game makes your passing game better in football, the ability to hit a short jumper makes your post moves more effective. Is it necessary? No. Should he take a lot of 15 foot jumpers? No. But if he has the look and can make it, it will make him a more effective post.

Just to take a very concrete look at this -- do you think it's true that (1) the lower shooting % on jumpers will be compensated for by higher shooting % on paint shots and his overall shooting % will stay the same or go up? Or that (2) his paint shooting % will stay the same but he'll have more opportunities to get the ball there (and more shots overall)? Or that (3) he'll generally be more versatile and his being able to plausibly play from midrange territory improves spacing so that team shooting % will go up? I guess it's hard to convince myself that 1 is true. Since his overall usage wasn't crazy high 2 could be true. (3) is getting complex enough that it seems like it would be hard to empirically evaluate.

Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: brewcity77 on August 26, 2015, 06:54:07 AM
Just to take a very concrete look at this -- do you think it's true that (1) the lower shooting % on jumpers will be compensated for by higher shooting % on paint shots and his overall shooting % will stay the same or go up? Or that (2) his paint shooting % will stay the same but he'll have more opportunities to get the ball there (and more shots overall)? Or that (3) he'll generally be more versatile and his being able to plausibly play from midrange territory improves spacing so that team shooting % will go up? I guess it's hard to convince myself that 1 is true. Since his overall usage wasn't crazy high 2 could be true. (3) is getting complex enough that it seems like it would be hard to empirically evaluate.

I do think it has more value, and of those, 3 is probably the closest to the truth, though not exactly why. If you can hit the midrange, it forces the defense to account for you out there. That can do a few things. First, it can pull the big defenders out as they guard the guy that can hit the midrange, opening the lane for other drivers (good option for a passing big, which Luke is). Second, it can create mismatches as you may draw a smaller defender, allowing the big man that can hit the midrange to shoot over his defender. Third, it can allow the big more freedom to make moves as he can draw his defender out, opening up the lane for him to get by said defender.

Of those three, I'd say for a guy like Luke, the first and second options would be the most viable. I just don't trust him enough to put the ball on the floor a couple times while trying to dribble around a defender from 15 feet to get to the hoop.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: GGGG on August 26, 2015, 09:08:15 AM
Luke is a true post.  He doesn't need to develop a 15 foot jumper in the college game.  The kid shot 61% from the field last year.  He's not going to shoot 62+% from 15 and out.  That's just going to lower his efficiency.

Shaq's game wouldn't have been any better by him developing a 15 foot jumper.  Some people are best planting their butt under the rim and going to work.  That's where Luke eats.  He used to shoot (and make) 3 pointers at Germantown.  But why stand out there and shoot 30% from there when you shoot 70% under the bucket?


Shaq's game would have been immensely better had he developed a 15 foot shot.  He just couldn't shoot.  Any time you add more versatility to your game, the harder you are to guard and the more defenses have to account for you.  Really if Shaq had developed anything resembling Tim Duncan's mid-range game, he would likely go down as the best big man in NBA history.

This is the first time I have seen anyone in a basketball thread arguing that adding additional dimensions to your game isn't a good thing. 

Now I think we can all agree that the OP's suggestion that Wojo might not be doing him any favors, and that it might be "off limits" for him to shoot that shot is a little odd.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on August 26, 2015, 09:15:44 AM
Bueller...Chico's....MIA

-Indiana Boards

I'm right here, sorry I missed your post.  College kids drinking at college.  I'm thunderstruck.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 26, 2015, 09:28:00 AM
I'm right here, sorry I missed your post.  College kids drinking at college.  I'm thunderstruck.

You would've been all over this if this was Bert.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 26, 2015, 09:32:12 AM

Shaq's game would have been immensely better had he developed a 15 foot shot.  He just couldn't shoot.  Any time you add more versatility to your game, the harder you are to guard and the more defenses have to account for you.  Really if Shaq had developed anything resembling Tim Duncan's mid-range game, he would likely go down as the best big man in NBA history.

This is the first time I have seen anyone in a basketball thread arguing that adding additional dimensions to your game isn't a good thing. 

Now I think we can all agree that the OP's suggestion that Wojo might not be doing him any favors, and that it might be "off limits" for him to shoot that shot is a little odd.

Sure, if he has the low post game perfected and it's either do nothing to improve your game and stay where you are or start working on a 15 foot jumper in practice then you might as well go ahead and work on your perimeter game.  But again, I don't see the need unless that is absolutely perfected, and it's not.  I'd rather have Luke continue to work on his low post game and shoot over 60% from the field with all of his shots coming from inside 8 feet than have him shoot 50% from the field overall because now he's taking 4 less shots from where he's shooting 60+% and moving them out to where he's going to shoot 35% from.  Who cares if the defense doesn't have to guard him from 15 feet when they can't stop him from 8 and in?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: GGGG on August 26, 2015, 09:39:43 AM
Sure, if he has the low post game perfected and it's either do nothing to improve your game and stay where you are or start working on a 15 foot jumper in practice then you might as well go ahead and work on your perimeter game.  But again, I don't see the need unless that is absolutely perfected, and it's not.  I'd rather have Luke continue to work on his low post game and shoot over 60% from the field with all of his shots coming from inside 8 feet than have him shoot 50% from the field overall because now he's taking 4 less shots from where he's shooting 60+% and moving them out to where he's going to shoot 35% from.  Who cares if the defense doesn't have to guard him from 15 feet when they can't stop him from 8 and in?


You are making the assumption that he would have a finite number of shots per game.  Last year he averaged 8 or so.  If he had the 15 foot shot as part of his arsenal, he would have likely had more shots.  And yes, while his efficiency may have gone down, overall team efficiency may have actually increased under such a scenario.  If he has another weapon that defenses have to respect, it opens passing lanes, driving lanes, etc. 
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on August 26, 2015, 10:11:29 AM
You would've been all over this if this was Bert.

If it led to a bunch of them also getting into a fight with fellow students \ non students...yes.  Which is what happened to Bert's boys...three times that we publicly know of.

Context is everything.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: GGGG on August 26, 2015, 10:13:12 AM
Yet you ignored the context in the IU case.  The one of the offenders is a repeat offender - you know, the guy whose was drunk driving when the other player jumped into it...or whatever you claimed earlier?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 26, 2015, 10:52:28 AM

You are making the assumption that he would have a finite number of shots per game.  Last year he averaged 8 or so.  If he had the 15 foot shot as part of his arsenal, he would have likely had more shots.  And yes, while his efficiency may have gone down, overall team efficiency may have actually increased under such a scenario.  If he has another weapon that defenses have to respect, it opens passing lanes, driving lanes, etc.

All fair points.  It'd be interesting to see.  I know Luke has good shooting touch and hit 3 pointers in high school, but obviously it's much different hitting a 3 pointer in high school and even consistently hitting a 12-15 footer in the Big East.  Right now I think him being our one true back to the basket post is the priority and I am fine if he doesn't shoot outside of 8-10 feet this season.  If he adds that to his game then we'll be an even better team.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MU82 on August 27, 2015, 09:25:53 AM
What would help Luke a lot would be if he had a bit of a face-up game.

Now, he catches the ball in the post and either backs in to shoot a little hook or has to pass back out.

If he could catch that ball in the post, turn and face the basket (and his defender) and either quickly shoot over him or do a pump-fake and/or a drop-step, it would add a nice little dimension.

This kind of move would help ANY post, not just Luke.

Having said that, every player has a role tied to his skills. And if Luke's skills mean he can only be a back-to-the-basket post, it is up to Wojo to use others' skills around that.

It looks like we have more players with considerably more skills than last season, which is very encouraging.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Galway Eagle on August 27, 2015, 09:39:38 AM
If it led to a bunch of them also getting into a fight with fellow students \ non students...yes.  Which is what happened to Bert's boys...three times that we publicly know of.

Context is everything.

Wait I remember Vander punching the kid in qdoba, and the brawl that was caught on tape at the club what's the other one?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 27, 2015, 09:43:35 AM
Wait I remember Vander punching the kid in qdoba, and the brawl that was caught on tape at the club what's the other one?

The "brawl at the club" that started as "DJO broke a glass bottle over someone's head" by Badger fans (and maybe Chicos/Hoopaloop at that time, to make Bert look "squirmy"), only to have the video come out and finding out it was really some players being moved out of the club because other people were fighting?  I'm sure Chicos/Hoopaloop was all over that, when in reality all that ever came of it was a couple of players getting cited for being in a club underage (not even an underage drinking ticket).  But with the latest of the many IU incidents under Crean, it's just college kids being college kids.  Chicos calling a spade a spade, a'ina?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: tower912 on August 27, 2015, 10:03:49 AM
I always loved that one.   Cited for being in a bar underage but not drinking. 
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Lennys Tap on August 27, 2015, 10:39:19 AM
If it led to a bunch of them also getting into a fight with fellow students \ non students...yes.  Which is what happened to Bert's boys...three times that we publicly know of.

Context is everything.

The first incident was Vander punching another student who (allegedly) made a racist remark. No mention of alcohol being involved.

The second turned out to be a total non event. No fight, no drinking. Underage basketball team members were in a club where alcohol was being served, nothing more.

Don't remember what the third incident was - if there was one.

At IU it's booze, drugs, driving when impaired, multiple offenses from the same people. The latest is the most pathetic. Sitting in a car outside a 7 Eleven at 1:00 am drinking vodka from a bottle . 7 alcohol/drug incidents in a very short time frame. That's IU's "context". That's IU's culture.

Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: swoopem on August 27, 2015, 10:52:56 AM
The first incident was Vander punching another student who (allegedly) made a racist remark. No mention of alcohol being involved.

The second turned out to be a total non event. No fight, no drinking. Underage basketball team members were in a club where alcohol was being served, nothing more.

Don't remember what the third incident was - if there was one.

At IU it's booze, drugs, driving when impaired, multiple offenses from the same people. The latest is the most pathetic. Sitting in a car outside a 7 Eleven at 1:00 am drinking vodka from a bottle . 7 alcohol/drug incidents in a very short time frame. That's IU's "context". That's IU's culture.

Yeah I don't really get the whole drinking while sitting in a parked car thing. You're on a college campus, go to a party where it'll A) be way more fun, B) there's a much smaller chance of getting in trouble, and C) you'll probably be treated like a celebrity. These kids were almost asking to be caught.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: CTWarrior on August 27, 2015, 11:33:32 AM
Yeah I don't really get the whole drinking while sitting in a parked car thing. You're on a college campus, go to a party where it'll A) be way more fun, B) there's a much smaller chance of getting in trouble, and C) you'll probably be treated like a celebrity. These kids were almost asking to be caught.

I don't know, its a different world out there in college now.  Last semester my son attended a frat party and alcohol was served and some guests took pictures and put them on Facebook or whatever and the fraternity was put on probation.  Those parties probably aren't as safe from trouble for athletes as they used to be, since everybody is carrying a camera now and overshare everything.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MU82 on August 27, 2015, 01:52:32 PM
If it led to a bunch of them also getting into a fight with fellow students \ non students...yes.  Which is what happened to Bert's boys...three times that we publicly know of.

Context is everything.

If this is true, it's too bad none of them had legally purchased guns on them. Because, mix guns with youth and booze and, well, nothing could ever go wrong!
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ATWizJr on August 27, 2015, 04:44:18 PM
Well, if things went wrong it would be the fault of the guns, for sure!
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MU82 on August 27, 2015, 11:00:39 PM
Well, if things went wrong it would be the fault of the guns, for sure!

That's the spirit.

Having said that ...

I now realize I should have left that comment for the political board. I apologize, mea culpa and all that.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: NickelDimer on August 28, 2015, 10:02:47 AM
count the basket and...automatic...automatic...
And 2?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on August 29, 2015, 07:19:34 PM
Yet you ignored the context in the IU case.  The one of the offenders is a repeat offender - you know, the guy whose was drunk driving when the other player jumped into it...or whatever you claimed earlier?

Not what I claimed, what the law enforcement investigators stated in their official report where no fault was found for the accident by that person.





Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on August 29, 2015, 07:20:06 PM
If this is true, it's too bad none of them had legally purchased guns on them. Because, mix guns with youth and booze and, well, nothing could ever go wrong!

Yes, it's a good thing....especially with some of their judgment. 

Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on August 29, 2015, 07:29:12 PM
The "brawl at the club" that started as "DJO broke a glass bottle over someone's head" by Badger fans (and maybe Chicos/Hoopaloop at that time, to make Bert look "squirmy"), only to have the video come out and finding out it was really some players being moved out of the club because other people were fighting?  I'm sure Chicos/Hoopaloop was all over that, when in reality all that ever came of it was a couple of players getting cited for being in a club underage (not even an underage drinking ticket).  But with the latest of the many IU incidents under Crean, it's just college kids being college kids.  Chicos calling a spade a spade, a'ina?

Sigh.  Yup, there you go again. Don't forget BMA, Brad Forester, etc, etc.

The video only captures part of it, 911 tapes as well.  Not sure who called it a brawl.  At any rate...

http://fox6now.com/2012/04/09/police-report-released-after-mu-basketball-incident-at-downtown-club/


At any rate, too much inside info from people I respect.  I'm glad his assistant was fired for breaking NCAA rules and lying about.  Glad people got to see Buzzard's reaction to it internally in the dept.  Some of the other crazy nonsense going on over the years.  He's in a better place that will allow that BS, and we are in a better place without him.

Just win baby is a terrible philosophy in college sports and one of the reasons why it has sullied it so much.  You can win without the nonsense, but enough people drink the kool aid when a few wins start piling up and they turn a blind eye.  No thanks. 

Now, who was it here that made this thread not about Luke Fischer? 
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: GGGG on August 29, 2015, 07:32:48 PM
Buzz wasn't a "just win baby" type of coach.  Not even close.  He was quirky, not well liked and made some recruiting mistakes, but he wasn't dirty from a recruiting or academic stand point.  Really you need to stop implying that's the case.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChitownSpaceForRent on August 29, 2015, 07:34:39 PM
Buzz wasn't a "just win baby" type of coach.  Not even close.  He was quirky, not well liked and made some recruiting mistakes, but he wasn't dirty from a recruiting or academic stand point.  Really you need to stop implying that's the case.

Todd Mayo recruiting was questionable. Nobody else that I knew of was sketchy but Todds recruitment was not very honest from what I hear.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: GGGG on August 29, 2015, 07:38:33 PM
Todd Mayo recruiting was questionable. Nobody else that I knew of was sketchy but Todds recruitment was not very honest from what I hear.


Should Todd have been here?  Probably not.  But I have not heard about any issues about his recruitment.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 29, 2015, 07:39:20 PM
Buzz wasn't a "just win baby" type of coach.  Not even close.  He was quirky, not well liked and made some recruiting mistakes, but he wasn't dirty from a recruiting or academic stand point.  Really you need to stop implying that's the case.

But Sultan, he's got inside sources.  Way too much inside information on it, in fact.  He just can't share any of it.  But he'll just call up one of his B1G AD friends to confirm it for him.  And...yup...confirmed.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 29, 2015, 07:46:17 PM
Sigh.  Yup, there you go again. Don't forget BMA, Brad Forester, etc, etc.

The video only captures part of it, 911 tapes as well.  Not sure who called it a brawl.  At any rate...

http://fox6now.com/2012/04/09/police-report-released-after-mu-basketball-incident-at-downtown-club/


At any rate, too much inside info from people I respect.  I'm glad his assistant was fired for breaking NCAA rules and lying about.  Glad people got to see Buzzard's reaction to it internally in the dept.  Some of the other crazy nonsense going on over the years.  He's in a better place that will allow that BS, and we are in a better place without him.

Just win baby is a terrible philosophy in college sports and one of the reasons why it has sullied it so much.  You can win without the nonsense, but enough people drink the kool aid when a few wins start piling up and they turn a blind eye.  No thanks. 

Now, who was it here that made this thread not about Luke Fischer? 

As if you haven't embarrassed yourself enough, you go and site Fox 6 News.  Wow.

So you'll take police reports for the Bible...as long as they make Tom Crean look like a saint (although, in reality, both people involved there were Tommy's kids so...), but if the police report (and the video) says that the only thing the 6 players were at fault for was being inside of a club (not drinking, just being physically inside the club) then it's wrong, and in fact Bert probably somehow is behind it all.  In fact, the players probably murdered a few guys inside that club but Bert got it all covered up.  You have way, way too much inside information on this topic, Chicos.  You can't tell us what the real story is, but it's not what the police, thanks to Bert, want you to think.

You really are something, Chicos.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on August 29, 2015, 09:24:16 PM
Not what I claimed, what the law enforcement investigators stated in their official report where no fault was found for the accident by that person.

lol, look again
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MU82 on August 29, 2015, 10:28:04 PM
As if you haven't embarrassed yourself enough, you go and site Fox 6 News.  Wow.

So you'll take police reports for the Bible...as long as they make Tom Crean look like a saint (although, in reality, both people involved there were Tommy's kids so...), but if the police report (and the video) says that the only thing the 6 players were at fault for was being inside of a club (not drinking, just being physically inside the club) then it's wrong, and in fact Bert probably somehow is behind it all.  In fact, the players probably murdered a few guys inside that club but Bert got it all covered up.  You have way, way too much inside information on this topic, Chicos.  You can't tell us what the real story is, but it's not what the police, thanks to Bert, want you to think.

You really are something, Chicos.

Aw, give him a break. He can't help who and what he is.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on August 30, 2015, 01:31:36 AM
Buzz wasn't a "just win baby" type of coach.  Not even close.  He was quirky, not well liked and made some recruiting mistakes, but he wasn't dirty from a recruiting or academic stand point.  Really you need to stop implying that's the case.

LW is on line one....
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: brewcity77 on August 30, 2015, 09:37:01 AM
Buzz wasn't a "just win baby" type of coach.  Not even close.  He was quirky, not well liked and made some recruiting mistakes, but he wasn't dirty from a recruiting or academic stand point.  Really you need to stop implying that's the case.

If Buzz was involved in dirty recruiting, he was doing it very, very wrong. He missed out on all the "dirty recruiting" worthy kids and if he was making special arrangements to get a lightly-recruited 3-star in Todd Mayo to a high-major program in the best basketball conference in the country (at the time), all I can ask is "why?".

Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: dgies9156 on August 30, 2015, 10:16:29 AM
The Hillbilly is gone and he ain't coming back. So can we all agree to the following:

  1) We had a good time when things were good.

  2) We're proud of Jae, JB, Wes, DJO and the rest of the guys who played for Marquette during the Hillbilly's time and have made it to the NBA. Impressive record.

  3) We had a bad divorce with the Hillbilly and he took everything of value in the house.

  4) We've moved on to a new "pretty girl" who brought in recruits this year the Hillbilly could only dream of. We've got a great team, a great coach and great potential.

Let's treat the Hillbilly like a bad ex-spouse. All we want to do is be National Champion with Coach Wojo and make the Hillbilly rot in his Hokie tomb down in West Nowhereville, Virginia.

So can we just ignore him, like the rest of college basketball is about to?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: keefe on August 30, 2015, 01:28:44 PM

So can we just ignore him, like the rest of college basketball is about to?


Why? The Bert Mobile has a lot of miles on her but she's good for another 100k
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Galway Eagle on August 30, 2015, 04:19:18 PM
The Hillbilly is gone and he ain't coming back. So can we all agree to the following:

  1) We had a good time when things were good.

  2) We're proud of Jae, JB, Wes, DJO and the rest of the guys who played for Marquette during the Hillbilly's time and have made it to the NBA. Impressive record.

  3) We had a bad divorce with the Hillbilly and he took everything of value in the house.

  4) We've moved on to a new "pretty girl" who brought in recruits this year the Hillbilly could only dream of. We've got a great team, a great coach and great potential.

Let's treat the Hillbilly like a bad ex-spouse. All we want to do is be National Champion with Coach Wojo and make the Hillbilly rot in his Hokie tomb down in West Nowhereville, Virginia.

So can we just ignore him, like the rest of college basketball is about to?

I agree with this overall but outside of Henry what recruit could buzz have only dreamed of? Let's not forget that Buzz brought in two top ten classes and plenty of those were top100s ranked higher than Haanif or the others wojo has brought in. Not saying that Buzz went after great character or that they all panned out but top 100 that Buzz brought were 

#31 J Wilson, #76 Cadougan, #79 Maymon, #95 Williams.

#31 Blue, #53 Jones.

#84 Taylor.

#27 JJJ, #34 Fisher, #39 Burton, #53 D Wilson

#83 Cohen (#54 Hill)

(#78 Noskowiak)

and I believe Harris was a top 100 before the suspension. 

#85 Haanif and #84 Houser are great adds but outside of #5 Henry who has Wojo brought in that Buzz couldn't touch?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on August 30, 2015, 06:04:14 PM
Haanif and Houser are great adds but outside of Henry who has Wojo brought in that Buzz couldn't touch?

Who is this Houser you speak of?

(also, lol at Harris)
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Loose Cannon on August 30, 2015, 07:00:32 PM

Haanif and Houser are great adds but outside of Henry who has Wojo brought in that Buzz couldn't touch?

  You may want to keep your eyes on Traci and Sacar and their contributions this year and the following years.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: WellsstreetWanderer on August 30, 2015, 09:13:15 PM
As if you haven't embarrassed yourself enough, you go and site Fox 6 News.  Wow.


Tired of people parroting this "Talking Point"  Ask Cheryl Atkinson why she left MSM. Or read her book and see where the "news" is really distorted and you won't sound like a kool aid drinker
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 30, 2015, 09:56:20 PM
Tired of people parroting this "Talking Point"  Ask Cheryl Atkinson why she left MSM. Or read her book and see where the "news" is really distorted and you won't sound like a kool aid drinker

I don't get into politics at all and I'll be the first to admit that. But I do know Fox 6 News is a complete joke.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Galway Eagle on August 30, 2015, 10:06:59 PM
  You may want to keep your eyes on Traci and Sacar and their contributions this year and the following years.

I agree they were highly underrated players and that Wojo made the right call but it's not like they were somehow players Buzz couldn't touch buzz brought in his fair share of underrated guys too. (Buycks, DJO, Jimmy, Jae)
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Galway Eagle on August 30, 2015, 10:11:42 PM
Who is this Houser you speak of?

(also, lol at Harris)

Didn't Sam Hauser verbally commit to us? My bad on the spelling

Why are you lolling at Harris? Like it or not the guy was a high rated prospect that buzz had committed to us.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Loose Cannon on August 30, 2015, 10:42:16 PM
I agree they were highly underrated players and that Wojo made the right call but it's not like they were somehow players Buzz couldn't touch buzz brought in his fair share of underrated guys too. (Buycks, DJO, Jimmy, Jae)

Agreed
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Herman Cain on August 30, 2015, 10:49:12 PM
The Hillbilly is gone and he ain't coming back. So can we all agree to the following:

  1) We had a good time when things were good.

  2) We're proud of Jae, JB, Wes, DJO and the rest of the guys who played for Marquette during the Hillbilly's time and have made it to the NBA. Impressive record.

  3) We had a bad divorce with the Hillbilly and he took everything of value in the house.

  4) We've moved on to a new "pretty girl" who brought in recruits this year the Hillbilly could only dream of. We've got a great team, a great coach and great potential.

Let's treat the Hillbilly like a bad ex-spouse. All we want to do is be National Champion with Coach Wojo and make the Hillbilly rot in his Hokie tomb down in West Nowhereville, Virginia.

So can we just ignore him, like the rest of college basketball is about to?
I agree with point 1 and 2. I agree with the first part of 3, but I think we split the property evenly.  I don't agree with point 4 other than we have potential.  Wojo has a lot to prove.   Also I always want our former coaches to do well, no matter how bad the divorce was. I believe there is still PR value in having alumni both player and coaches do well. So as distasteful as things were at the end,  I still would like to see Va Tech do well under him.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: dgies9156 on August 31, 2015, 12:43:32 AM
I agree they were highly underrated players and that Wojo made the right call but it's not like they were somehow players Buzz couldn't touch buzz brought in his fair share of underrated guys too. (Buycks, DJO, Jimmy, Jae)

There was no way we were going to get Henry or Diamond if the Hillbilly was head coach. Something happened when Wojo took over that impressed Henry and his family.

I agree a lot of guys were underrated and we did well with some really good ballplayers. But one of the most significant complaints about the Hillbilly was that he did not recruit and develop freshmen. Most of the high performers under the Hillbilly were Jucos. And if I had a dime for every time someone here was complaining about Jucos while the Hillbilly was here, I would be rich.

I used to say in here that the most important job the Hillbilly had was developing Vander. I was right and what irritated the Hillbilly to no end was Vander leaving after he got good.

Now, let's let the Hillbilly go. He is entombed down in West Bumfork, VA. I hope we never hear his name again. Ever.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: 4everwarriors on August 31, 2015, 06:43:57 AM
Crean sucks
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Nukem2 on August 31, 2015, 07:53:44 AM
Crean sucks
You have posted that hundreds of times.  What did he do to you personally? 
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: warriorchick on August 31, 2015, 08:20:54 AM
You have posted that hundreds of times.  What did he do to you personally?

This is why I have him 4never on "ignore".  Ten thousand posts and not one of them worth reading.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: swoopem on August 31, 2015, 08:35:27 AM
Crean sucks

You have posted that hundreds of times and I enjoy it every time.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Galway Eagle on August 31, 2015, 08:55:28 AM
There was no way we were going to get Henry or Diamond if the Hillbilly was head coach. Something happened when Wojo took over that impressed Henry and his family.

I agree a lot of guys were underrated and we did well with some really good ballplayers. But one of the most significant complaints about the Hillbilly was that he did not recruit and develop freshmen. Most of the high performers under the Hillbilly were Jucos. And if I had a dime for every time someone here was complaining about Jucos while the Hillbilly was here, I would be rich.

I used to say in here that the most important job the Hillbilly had was developing Vander. I was right and what irritated the Hillbilly to no end was Vander leaving after he got good.

Now, let's let the Hillbilly go. He is entombed down in West Bumfork, VA. I hope we never hear his name again. Ever.

See this post I agree with more but like I said before beyond Henry Buzz certainly has shown that he could get comprable talent out of HS. But develop it? Barely. Hold on to it? Rarely. I was only stressing that Henry is the only player that wojo's gotten that Buzz couldn't have touched.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: GGGG on August 31, 2015, 09:00:06 AM
There was no way we were going to get Henry or Diamond if the Hillbilly was head coach. Something happened when Wojo took over that impressed Henry and his family.

I agree a lot of guys were underrated and we did well with some really good ballplayers. But one of the most significant complaints about the Hillbilly was that he did not recruit and develop freshmen. Most of the high performers under the Hillbilly were Jucos. And if I had a dime for every time someone here was complaining about Jucos while the Hillbilly was here, I would be rich.

I used to say in here that the most important job the Hillbilly had was developing Vander. I was right and what irritated the Hillbilly to no end was Vander leaving after he got good.

Now, let's let the Hillbilly go. He is entombed down in West Bumfork, VA. I hope we never hear his name again. Ever.


Outside of Henry, I don't think the top high school players that Buzz recruited were that much different than Wojo.  The problem I had with Buzz is that he took too many flyers on players that should have been here (Ferguson, Roseboro) and there wasn't a lot of development while they were here.  (Although JJJ hasn't developed much yet under Wojo too.)
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 31, 2015, 09:29:41 AM
You have posted that hundreds of times and I enjoy it every time.

+1
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: 4everwarriors on August 31, 2015, 09:45:55 AM
This is why I have him 4never on "ignore".  Ten thousand posts and not one of them worth reading.



Says the woman of wisdom and all statements profound. Different strokes for different folks, Babe, hey?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Lennys Tap on August 31, 2015, 10:14:44 AM
And if I had a dime for every time someone here was complaining about Jucos while the Hillbilly was here, I would be rich.



1,841 (# of Chico's complaints about jucos under Buzz) + 12 (# of all other Scooper's combined complaints about jucos under Buzz) = 1,853. You'd have $183.50 - not quite rich, but a start.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Lennys Tap on August 31, 2015, 10:22:21 AM
You have posted that hundreds of times and I enjoy it every time.

Any poem by Yeats, Beethoven's 5th symphony, 4ever's oration against TC - one never tires of the true classics.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: dgies9156 on August 31, 2015, 10:29:32 AM
1,841 (# of Chico's complaints about jucos under Buzz) + 12 (# of all other Scooper's combined complaints about jucos under Buzz) = 1,853. You'd have $183.50 - not quite rich, but a start.

A foundation for an investment!  :-)
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MuMark on August 31, 2015, 10:39:25 AM
Didn't Sam Hauser verbally commit to us? My bad on the spelling

Why are you lolling at Harris? Like it or not the guy was a high rated prospect that buzz had committed to us.

Are you referring to Jon Harris?

You think Buzz recruited him and he was a "high rated" prospect?

Seriously?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: BM1090 on August 31, 2015, 10:45:04 AM
Are you referring to Jon Harris?

You think Buzz recruited him and he was a "high rated" prospect?

Seriously?

Malek Harris, I'm assuming.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Galway Eagle on August 31, 2015, 10:51:39 AM
Are you referring to Jon Harris?

You think Buzz recruited him and he was a "high rated" prospect?

Seriously?

Malek Harris, wasn't the kid top 100 when he committed and fell out when he tried to mix hair styling and pyrotechnics together? 

And off of that original post I forgot to include Ahmed Hill
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 31, 2015, 11:54:05 AM
1,841 (# of Chico's complaints about jucos under Buzz) + 12 (# of all other Scooper's combined complaints about jucos under Buzz) = 1,853. You'd have $183.50 - not quite rich, but a start.

Any poem by Yeats, Beethoven's 5th symphony, 4ever's oration against TC - one never tires of the true classics.

You are on a freaking roll.  I almost just choked on my lunch reading that first post.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: The Lens on August 31, 2015, 11:58:24 AM
1,841 (# of Chico's complaints about jucos under Buzz) + 12 (# of all other Scooper's combined complaints about jucos under Buzz) = 1,853. You'd have $183.50 - not quite rich, but a start.

If we learned anything from Buzz's move (and resulting home sale) it's that we should all lower our footprint and downsize our homes.  $183 may just be enough.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MuMark on August 31, 2015, 04:09:00 PM
Malek Harris, wasn't the kid top 100 when he committed and fell out when he tried to mix hair styling and pyrotechnics together? 

And off of that original post I forgot to include Ahmed Hill

thanks for clarifying....I forgot about Harris since he never made it here for reasons of his own making. Looks like he is going to be another top 100 guy who Buzz recruited that washes out.

Didn't somebody say this was no big deal? Crean apparently didn't agree and was forced to dismiss.....http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/college/indiana/2015/08/31/emmitt-holt-indiana-hoosiers-dismissed-alcohol-incident/71481240/
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: PuertoRicanNightmare on August 31, 2015, 04:29:09 PM
You have posted that hundreds of times and I enjoy it every time.
Agreed.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on August 31, 2015, 10:19:57 PM
I don't get into politics at all and I'll be the first to admit that. But I do know Fox 6 News is a complete joke.

LOL.  Doesn't fit your notion of things, so it is a complete joke.  Whatever. 

Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on August 31, 2015, 10:26:46 PM
A foundation for an investment!  :-)

I'd like an accounting
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on August 31, 2015, 10:27:39 PM
lol, look again

I have.....again in today's report...NO FAULT FOUND.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/25286002/indiana-dismisses-sophomore-guard-emmitt-holt
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on August 31, 2015, 11:17:59 PM
LOL.  Doesn't fit your notion of things, so it is a complete joke.  Whatever.

Uhh, nope.  It's a complete joke because, well, they've had numerous lawsuits for defamation.  They are a complete joke.

But hey, continue to go around and site Fox 6 news articles, you'll really gain some credibility!

LOL.

By the way, you do seem like the kind of guy who would champion the fact that the underage player who had been drinking and got behind the wheel of the car was "not at fault, according to the police report," for *hitting* his teammate with his car, after he had been driving, after drinking, at the age of 18 years old.  BUT if these were Bert's players, you'd be screaming passive aggressive racist remarks and calling for their beheading, talking about how shameful they are to their schools, etc.  "Win at all cost, calling a spade a spade, #alllivesmatter, LOL, my God," etc, etc, etc.

Second by the way, any idea how I can get a hold of Hoopaloop?  He went missing essentially the minute your ban was lifted.  I would like to get his take on all of the happenings going on over at IU with the Tanned Man.  I assume you have a number, email, etc. to contact him, given that you gave him some beer, Disney tickets, welcomed him to dine in your back yard, and shared some great memories with him.  He is missed around here.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 01, 2015, 12:19:12 AM
Why don't you ask Brad Forester, BMA725, Trekyfoil or some of the others....Ners, Equalizer, etc?   Lots of people are missed around here, some really good posters and not so good ones. 

Glad to see you are admitting that no fault was found by the police, which is the only thing I have stated about it.  Did you ever thank me for the Big Ten 4 year scholarship requirements now...or the Big 12, or the ACC....I may have missed it.  You often say how others here can't admit they are wrong....irony.

Numerous defamation lawsuits?  Can you point me to the numerous ones?  Would they be on the "numerousdefamationlawsuitsbyfox6news.com"?

Calling for a beheading?  Nah.   Racist remarks?  Uhm, not in your lifetime.  All Lives Matter, not just those of one part of the population. I can't imagine anything being less racial. 

What else you got?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: keefe on September 01, 2015, 02:58:47 AM
Trekyfoil

that guy doesn't post here anymore because he died a few years ago.

At least that's his excuse if he could post it...
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on September 01, 2015, 06:41:49 AM
Why don't you ask Brad Forester, BMA725, Trekyfoil or some of the others....Ners, Equalizer, etc?   Lots of people are missed around here, some really good posters and not so good ones. 

Glad to see you are admitting that no fault was found by the police, which is the only thing I have stated about it.  Did you ever thank me for the Big Ten 4 year scholarship requirements now...or the Big 12, or the ACC....I may have missed it.  You often say how others here can't admit they are wrong....irony.

Numerous defamation lawsuits?  Can you point me to the numerous ones?  Would they be on the "numerousdefamationlawsuitsbyfox6news.com"?

Calling for a beheading?  Nah.   Racist remarks?  Uhm, not in your lifetime.  All Lives Matter, not just those of one part of the population. I can't imagine anything being less racial. 

What else you got?

LOL. I did thank you for that information and admit I did not know that. So nothing ironic at all about it. LOL. Your reading comprehension is pretty piss poor so not surprising that you missed it. My God. LOL.

Might want to look up Fox 6 defamation lawsuits. LOL. Hell, in the court of law a judge even ruled that Fox 6 did not report news. So yes, I would say Fox 6 news is a JOKE. My God. LOL. But again, please keep hanging your hat on Fox 6 News. LOL.

How does #blacklivesmatter imply not all lives matter? LOL. Once again, your reading comprehension fails you miserably. Might want to look into taking some classes to save face. If I say "I love cheeseburgers" that must mean I hate steak in your language. LOL. My God.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on September 01, 2015, 07:25:51 AM
I have.....again in today's report...NO FAULT FOUND.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/25286002/indiana-dismisses-sophomore-guard-emmitt-holt

Inaccurate reporting
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MuMark on September 01, 2015, 03:20:04 PM
@JeffRabjohns: Juwan Morgan, Hanner Perea also in the vehicle when Bryant, Holt circles for illegal possession, per law enforcement. http://t.co/2X3WE8E6hE
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Skatastrophy on September 01, 2015, 06:06:14 PM
This is the worst thread.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on September 01, 2015, 06:10:25 PM
@JeffRabjohns: Juwan Morgan, Hanner Perea also in the vehicle when Bryant, Holt circles for illegal possession, per law enforcement. http://t.co/2X3WE8E6hE

Did the police report state as much?

Just trying to make sure we're calling spades spades here, and not ignoring the police report.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on September 01, 2015, 07:42:07 PM
@JeffRabjohns: Juwan Morgan, Hanner Perea also in the vehicle when Bryant, Holt circles for illegal possession, per law enforcement. http://t.co/2X3WE8E6hE

Uh oh.  Hanging with two dismissed players on probation?  Whose fault?  #programat8.5onthesquirmometer
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: rocky_warrior on September 01, 2015, 08:57:00 PM
Did the police report state as much?

Just trying to make sure we're calling spades spades here, and not ignoring the police report.

Wades...I get your point, but let it go.  It's better for everyone, and chicos will never stop responding.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MU82 on September 01, 2015, 11:53:51 PM
How 'bout that Luke Fischer, huh?!?!
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Skatastrophy on September 02, 2015, 06:01:57 AM
How 'bout that Luke Fischer, huh?!?!

He sho'is tall!
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: tower912 on September 02, 2015, 06:11:26 AM
And healthy.   I look forward to watching him work in tandem with Henry. 
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on September 02, 2015, 09:53:08 AM
More good games from Luke means more shots of the Doublemint twins.  Last year, this would have been far preferable to watching the product on the court.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Newsdreams on September 02, 2015, 09:56:58 AM
More good games from Luke means more shots of the Doublemint twins.  Last year, this would have been far preferable to watching the product on the court.
+1
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 03, 2015, 09:37:57 AM
This is the worst thread.

Concur
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 03, 2015, 09:39:25 AM
Did the police report state as much?

Just trying to make sure we're calling spades spades here, and not ignoring the police report.

Yes, in fact it did.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 03, 2015, 09:41:13 AM
LOL. I did thank you for that information and admit I did not know that. So nothing ironic at all about it. LOL. Your reading comprehension is pretty piss poor so not surprising that you missed it. My God. LOL.

Might want to look up Fox 6 defamation lawsuits. LOL. Hell, in the court of law a judge even ruled that Fox 6 did not report news. So yes, I would say Fox 6 news is a JOKE. My God. LOL. But again, please keep hanging your hat on Fox 6 News. LOL.

How does #blacklivesmatter imply not all lives matter? LOL. Once again, your reading comprehension fails you miserably. Might want to look into taking some classes to save face. If I say "I love cheeseburgers" that must mean I hate steak in your language. LOL. My God.

Definitely missed it.  If you did, that was awfully nice of you.   Can you tell me if the defamation lawsuits are more or less than any other station in the area?   Thanks....I'm learning so much from you and want to learn more.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MU82 on September 03, 2015, 10:40:09 AM
And that Luke Fischer ... young man sure is a tall drink o' water, huh?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: naginiF on September 03, 2015, 11:43:29 AM
And that Luke Fischer ... young man sure is a tall drink o' water, huh?
If he developed a mid range jumper would you say it would help him a whole lot or not at all?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on September 03, 2015, 06:25:29 PM
Yes, in fact it did.

It did not.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: tower912 on September 03, 2015, 06:26:16 PM
Post it. 
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 05, 2015, 12:40:15 PM
It did not.

Please post the police report.  I'm going off of multiple media reports.  You are the only one saying it didn't happen that way.  You may be right, but please provide the proof then.

Right now here who is saying "NO FAULT FOUND"

Indianapolis Star    http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/college/indiana/2014/11/03/crash-report-devin-davis-accident-details-emerge/18414869/

CBS Sports   http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/25286002/indiana-dismisses-sophomore-guard-emmitt-holt

ESPN   http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/11816835/devin-davis-indiana-hoosiers-fault-car-accident-police-say

Sports Illustrated   http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2014/11/04/indiana-devin-davis-fault-car-accident

Journal Gazette  http://www.journalgazette.net/sports/colleges/iu/IU--Crean-send-message--Holt-out-8537047

AP, Bloomington Herald, Louisville Courier, so on and on

Again, you may be right....could you post the police report please.  Thanks
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on September 05, 2015, 02:06:57 PM
Please post the police report.  I'm going off of multiple media reports.  You are the only one saying it didn't happen that way.  You may be right, but please provide the proof then.

Again, you may be right....could you post the police report please.  Thanks

THANK YOU for finally admitting that you have not reviewed the police report. It does not say "no fault found."

You and I have been down this very path - where you claim I can't possibly be correct because tons of "traditional media" outlets are reporting something different.

You obviously didn't learn the first time. Continue to trust "the big names" and continue to be wrong if you wish.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 05, 2015, 02:58:50 PM
THANK YOU for finally admitting that you have not reviewed the police report. It does not say "no fault found."

You and I have been down this very path - where you claim I can't possibly be correct because tons of "traditional media" outlets are reporting something different.

You obviously didn't learn the first time. Continue to trust "the big names" and continue to be wrong if you wish.

I said, clearly, the police report says no fault found as reported by the media.  They talked to the police, they (presumably) looked at the police report.

I think I very much learned, that's why I asked you to post it and I clearly said, AGAIN, "you may be right".  The onus, however, is for you to prove that.  Now, you are the one saying it does not say no fault found or does not assign blame (whatever words you want to use) to Holt.  The media has said over and over that isn't the case.  Because you were right the last time, doesn't make you right this time....but you could very well be right.  Right now, we only have what the reporters are saying based on their interviews with police, what the police have stated, and presumably what they saw in a report. 
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Newsdreams on September 05, 2015, 03:37:15 PM
Any predictions on Fischer stats for this year?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: THRILLHO on September 05, 2015, 04:01:54 PM
Any predictions on Fischer stats for this year?

I think we will play faster this year so all his numbers will go up. Probably around the same minutes (30/game), but more shooting, similar efficiency, and more rebounds. He may also get a better assist rate as he has better pass out options. Just taking a guess -- 13.5 ppg, 6 rpg, 1.5 assists per game, and 0 police reports.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 05, 2015, 04:05:43 PM
Any predictions on Fischer stats for this year?

13 and 6

Needs to get his FT% up above the 59% from last year. 
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MuMark on September 05, 2015, 04:17:35 PM
I think the shoulder injury hampered his free throw shooting last year. Should improve now that he is healthy.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Newsdreams on September 05, 2015, 04:44:35 PM
I think we will play faster this year so all his numbers will go up. Probably around the same minutes (30/game), but more shooting, similar efficiency, and more rebounds. He may also get a better assist rate as he has better pass out options. Just taking a guess -- 13.5 ppg, 6 rpg, 1.5 assists per game, and 0 police reports.
I see what you did there  :D
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: bilsu on September 05, 2015, 08:54:46 PM
We will be a bad rebounding team, if he averages on 6 rebounds a game. 14pts 9 rbs
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 05, 2015, 09:02:15 PM
I think we will play faster this year so all his numbers will go up. Probably around the same minutes (30/game), but more shooting, similar efficiency, and more rebounds. He may also get a better assist rate as he has better pass out options. Just taking a guess -- 13.5 ppg, 6 rpg, 1.5 assists per game, and 0 police reports.

With Buzz gone, there is a pretty good chance that happens.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on September 05, 2015, 09:16:10 PM
FT% is nearly irrelevant
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: THRILLHO on September 07, 2015, 06:42:49 AM
We will be a bad rebounding them, if he averages on 6 rebounds a game. 14pts 9 rbs

I think our team rebounding will be a lot better this year just because we'll be playing with more height at every position. I'm just not sure how realistic it is to expect a player to increase rebounds so dramatically without increased minutes. My intuition is that it's kind of a hard thing to teach and not skill-dependent like shooting - guys aren't in the gym all summer rebounding like they might be putting up shots. (Maybe I'm wrong about that.) I'll give him some credit for being healthy but not sure it's reasonable to expect him to be nearly twice as good.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on September 07, 2015, 09:04:17 AM
Real question: What do folks think Luke's rebounding percentages can be this year?

With the broken wing a year ago, he was at 6.8% and 12.8%. In limited time at I4, he was 11.1% and 12.6%.

I'd *like* to see OR% at 9%+ and DR% approaching 17%+... a DR% of less than 15% would not be pleasing.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: brewcity77 on September 07, 2015, 11:00:18 AM
Real question: What do folks think Luke's rebounding percentages can be this year?

With the broken wing a year ago, he was at 6.8% and 12.8%. In limited time at I4, he was 11.1% and 12.6%.

I'd *like* to see OR% at 9%+ and DR% approaching 17%+... a DR% of less than 15% would not be pleasing.

I think we need him to be at least as good on the boards as Teve was. I'd like to see 10+% in the offensive glass and 18+% on defensive. If he's truly the best center in the Big East, no reason he shouldn't be in the top 200-300 in both categories in the country.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Loose Cannon on September 07, 2015, 11:43:02 AM
FT% is nearly irrelevant



  Mostly agree,  except for the last THree minutes.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on September 07, 2015, 12:27:51 PM


  Mostly agree,  except for the last THree minutes.

In certain moments, anything can be important. I'm speaking on FT% as a metric to determine whether your team is good or not, or has a major problem..

Down 2 with 4 seconds left and you miss a shot, offensive rebounding becomes enormously huge.

Down 3 shooting from 3/4 down the court at the buzzer, buzzer beating shooting is huge.

FT% though.. in general,.. faaaar down the list.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 07, 2015, 12:34:39 PM
FT% doesn't really determine if a team is good or not.  I don't think anyone claimed that to be the case.  The importance of it, however, is obvious.  These are free points.  Fischer shot only 58% last year.  Get that to 70% and it's worth (rounding) an extra point per game for him and the team.

Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on September 07, 2015, 01:33:46 PM
FT% doesn't really determine if a team is good or not.  I don't think anyone claimed that to be the case.  The importance of it, however, is obvious.  These are free points.  Fischer shot only 58% last year.  Get that to 70% and it's worth (rounding) an extra point per game for him and the team.

70% would not be worth an extra point per game rounding to the nearest point.

Nonetheless, "these are free points" is a bizarre thing to say. If they were free points, they would be granted - end of story.

They're not free points.

To suggest so is wrong and outlandish.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MuMark on September 07, 2015, 04:28:11 PM
If he shoots the same number of free throws as he did last year and shoots 70% instead of 58% it would mean 10 more points in a season.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: brandx on September 07, 2015, 04:59:19 PM
If he shoots the same number of free throws as he did last year and shoots 70% instead of 58% it would mean 10 more points in a season.

That's why JB is right.

Getting to the line often is important for several reason and situational FT shooting is important (last two minutes of the game).

Overall, though, it's way down on the list.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: naginiF on September 07, 2015, 06:49:15 PM
That's why JB is right.

Getting to the line often is important for several reason and situational FT shooting is important (last two minutes of the game).

Overall, though, it's way down on the list.
I've always looked at overall FT% as a leading indicator of a teams focus, conditioning, and, for lack of a better descriptor, discipline.  Teams that can't hit free throws are either super talented and don't need that focus or teams i wouldn't trust in clutch situations.  Does it singularly effect W's and L's?  As was pointed out, no.  As a non 'top 10' program would I feel more confident with a 10 pt higher FT% going into March?  Absolutely - preparation and execution are the only things that can overcome superior talent. 

Clearly not the only/primary indicator.  But isn't it a pretty good leading indicator?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on September 07, 2015, 06:57:42 PM
I've always looked at overall FT% as a leading indicator of a teams focus, conditioning, and, for lack of a better descriptor, discipline.  Teams that can't hit free throws are either super talented and don't need that focus or teams i wouldn't trust in clutch situations.  Does it singularly effect W's and L's?  As was pointed out, no.  As a non 'top 10' program would I feel more confident with a 10 pt higher FT% going into March?  Absolutely - preparation and execution are the only things that can overcome superior talent. 

Clearly not the only/primary indicator.  But isn't it a pretty good leading indicator?

No. It's not a good indicator and your thoughts are complete off base and unsupported by facts.

Ask Izzo. #328 in the nation. Final Four.

Ask Steve Fischer.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: naginiF on September 07, 2015, 09:36:34 PM
No. It's not a good indicator and your thoughts are complete off base and unsupported by facts.

Ask Izzo. #328 in the nation. Final Four.

Ask Steve Fischer.
totally agree on my thoughts being unsupported by facts, I'm far from a CBB statistician or insider. 

Other than looking at w's and l's what stats should i look at as indicators of a team that is over or under performing their potential?  It's a complicated answer, but I'm not a former high school player/coach and I want to make my positions defendable (that sounds snarky but it's really not).
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 08, 2015, 10:01:18 AM
70% would not be worth an extra point per game rounding to the nearest point.

Nonetheless, "these are free points" is a bizarre thing to say. If they were free points, they would be granted - end of story.

They're not free points.

To suggest so is wrong and outlandish.

My fault, thanks for the correction.  I ran it at 70% and then at the FT% he shot at IU, which was 78%.  It was the 78% then we get to an extra point per game.  At 70% it's roughly a half point.

Would you be more acceptable to Free Points Opportunity?  I was raised by coaches that called them free points...there to be taken if you master an easy shot.  That's my bias, but I've heard plenty of coaches call them "free points".  I wouldn't call it wrong, or outlandish.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Lennys Tap on September 08, 2015, 10:25:12 AM
My fault, thanks for the correction.  I ran it at 70% and then at the FT% he shot at IU, which was 78%.  It was the 78% then we get to an extra point per game.  At 70% it's roughly a half point.

Would you be more acceptable to Free Points Opportunity?  I was raised by coaches that called them free points...there to be taken if you master an easy shot.  That's my bias, but I've heard plenty of coaches call them "free points".  I wouldn't call it wrong, or outlandish.

1. Yet another error at simple math. Not surprising.

2. Provably wrong, but since you (and all those basketball coaches who raised you) say it anyway that makes it something you wouldn't call wrong. What an absolutely perfect example of outlandish!
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole on September 08, 2015, 10:33:54 AM
They aren't "free points" and I have never heard a coach say that.  They are "free throws" or more accurately "free shots."

The math is interesting though.  I think they get over magnified because we always remember them being missed in "clutch" situations.  Like this headline.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/08/AR2008040800211.html

Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MuMark on September 08, 2015, 11:46:45 AM
I somehow forgot that Luke missed 9 games last year so if he had played a full season and shot 70% instead of 58.....he would have scored 15 more points.

I think we would all agree it is better to have good free throw shooters then bad 1s.

No matter what else you do if you make a few more free throws it can make the difference in close games.

Other factors are obviously more important but since few teams are good at everything I'll take good free throw shooting if I can get it.....especially late in a close game.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: CTWarrior on September 08, 2015, 11:56:41 AM
I would expect us to play at a more rapid pace this year as we have more horses.  Couple that with Luke being healthy there is a good chance he will get to the line more often, so that the importance of FT% will ramp out. 

I get JB's point that even if you factor in all of that the difference between 70% and 58% isn't going to be more than a point a game and a lot of things are more likely to improve our W/L % than that.  I also that the biggest thing Luke can do to help us win is to up that defensive rebounding percentage.  Even from a psychological/coaching standpoint, giving up second chance points are more painful than leaving points at the FT line, IMO.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: brewcity77 on September 08, 2015, 12:33:43 PM
eFG% will always pretty much trump anything else. Free throws are nice when you are talking at a team level. If you are looking at a team shooting 58% versus 70%, that's a bit of a difference. Not a ton, bit a bit.

Last year we averaged 19 FTA per game. The difference in percentages is 11.02 points versus 13.3. If you are a team that plays a ton of close games, a 12% boost would be a solid improvement and might make the difference in a handful of games.

But to compare to eFG% differences...

12% Team FT improvement: 2.28 ppg

*This improvement from 58% to 70% would signify an improvement from 350th in the nation to 148th, a jump of 201 spots.

2% Team eFG improvement: 2.12 ppg

*This improvement from 49.8% to 51.8% would signify an improvement from 128th in the nation to 68th, a jump of 60 spots.

So for 2 percentage points of Team eFG%, you get nearly the same benefit you would gain from the entire team improving their FT% by 12 percentage points. That's why you'll see most statheads preach the value of eFG%. Because it takes relatively small incremental differences to make a big difference to offensive efficiency.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: bilsu on September 08, 2015, 10:38:40 PM
I think it is safe to assume that a team that shot 58% from the line missed a number of front ends of one and ones. Therefore, the 19 free throw attempts might go to 20+ free throw attemtps, which would result in a bigger point pick up. In a close game, where the other team is fouling you to get back in the game it becomes very important to hit the front end of a one and ones.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 08, 2015, 11:37:21 PM
They aren't "free points" and I have never heard a coach say that.  They are "free throws" or more accurately "free shots."


My coaches called them free points, but I understand the quibble I suppose

Appears I wasn't alone in hearing this.  Plenty of examples:

Kenny Smith being one.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/should-the-nba-free-the-free-throw-1431558154

Chris Collins another   http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-03-15/sports/ct-free-throws-spt-0316-20140316_1_charity-stripe-free-throw-march-madness

Karl Anthony Towns   https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2015/03/15/karl-anthony-towns-is-kentuckys-free-throw-shooting-marvel/

Baynes   http://www.freep.com/story/sports/nba/pistons/2015/08/10/detroit-pistons-aron-bayne/31441435/

Frank the Tank  http://www.coachcal.com/34373/2015/04/uk-ready-to-contend-with-foul-averse-wisconsin-kaminsky/

Gonzaga...http://m.spokesman.com/stories/2007/feb/25/free-throws-mean-free-points/

UMass coach...  http://www.masslive.com/umassbasketball/index.ssf/2014/11/five_takeaways_from_umass_bask_7.html


Tennessee....
http://www.knoxnews.com/govolsxtra/basketball/free-throws-make-big-difference-for-lady-vols-in-win_26571856

etc, etc.  I heard it all the time and by the quick search, looks like many others did or still use the phrase.

Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 08, 2015, 11:40:36 PM
No. It's not a good indicator and your thoughts are complete off base and unsupported by facts.

Ask Izzo. #328 in the nation. Final Four.

Ask Steve Fischer.

The flip side of that, Wisconsin in the championship and a top 10 FT shooting team.  Whether it is a good indicator or not, I have no doubt we can all find stats that "prove" or "disprove" their importance.  At the end of the day, the task at hand is to score more than the opponent.  Shooting a high FT% will equate to more points and more point opportunities (making the bonuses). 

There are certainly more important stats, but cashing in on free point opportunities is one that many (not all) good teams take advantage of.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MU82 on September 09, 2015, 12:14:29 AM
TWhether it is a good indicator or not, I have no doubt we can all find stats that "prove" or "disprove" their importance.

Hey, Chicos, you sound like me talking about the stats you select to "prove" stuff on the politics board. Funny.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: brewcity77 on September 09, 2015, 06:09:10 AM
I think it is safe to assume that a team that shot 58% from the line missed a number of front ends of one and ones. Therefore, the 19 free throw attempts might go to 20+ free throw attemtps, which would result in a bigger point pick up. In a close game, where the other team is fouling you to get back in the game it becomes very important to hit the front end of a one and ones.

Very true. You want to make your free throws, clearly. Just illustrating the difference in significance between the two and how an incremental eFG% increase is as valuable as a massive FT% increase.

My real hope is that we improve in both of those aspects this year.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: WarriorInNYC on September 09, 2015, 07:14:37 AM
I think it is safe to assume that a team that shot 58% from the line missed a number of front ends of one and ones. Therefore, the 19 free throw attempts might go to 20+ free throw attemtps, which would result in a bigger point pick up. In a close game, where the other team is fouling you to get back in the game it becomes very important to hit the front end of a one and ones.

Valid point.  There are a total of 6 one and one opportunities in a game for a team (fouls 7, 8, and 9), so a team shooting 58% you would expect to miss 2 per game (assuming no shooting fouls).  So the team would be missing an additional 2 free throws per game.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: bilsu on September 09, 2015, 08:50:59 AM
Valid point.  There are a total of 6 one and one opportunities in a game for a team (fouls 7, 8, and 9), so a team shooting 58% you would expect to miss 2 per game (assuming no shooting fouls).  So the team would be missing an additional 2 free throws per game.
I thought about that, but free throw shooting only matters in close games. That is when a team that is behind will foul you three straight times to get the ball back. Miss the front end of all three one & one's in and you come away empty. The possibilities are 0-3, 1-4, 2-4, 3-5, 4-5, 5-6 and 6-6, so in a close game you are looking at a range of 0 to 6 points on the second half 1-1 opportunities. Assuming all are shooting fouls the possibilities are 0-6, 1-6, 2-6, 3-6, 4-6, 5-6, which is still a range of 6 points. Then you have to account for who is fouled. A 70% free throw shooting team is going to have players who shoot 65% and 75%. a team intentionally fouling is going to target the 65% free throw shooter. Besides that it seems to me that free throw shooting is contagious. The first free throw shooter missing two free throws seems to make it more likely that the next shooter will also miss and the first free throw shooter making both free throws seems to make it more likely the next will make both. It may not be reality, but how else do you explain the same team making 25-26 one night and them the next game making 11-26. I would guess that in MU's 31 games this year that 20 of the games the score differential will be big enough that the free throw shooting will not matter. Assuming that is correct there are 11 games that outcome will depend on free throw shooting. Remember it is how both teams shoot that matters.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MU82 on September 09, 2015, 04:39:53 PM
Stats schmatz. Just make the effen free throws.

The only time anybody really notices them is when they are missed by the losing team and/or in a close game.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on September 09, 2015, 07:18:12 PM
My coaches called them free points, but I understand the quibble I suppose


It's a stupid phrase to describe a free throw today, but the origin of the free throw is actually such that FREE POINTS (no shots required) was the initial rule.

The reality is for DECADES we've seen the avg kid shoot around 69% in college basketball. Hardly free.

It's not a "quibble" -- free throws aren't free points. That's indisputable, regardless of what you want to call it.

Valid point.  There are a total of 6 one and one opportunities in a game for a team (fouls 7, 8, and 9), so a team shooting 58% you would expect to miss 2 per game (assuming no shooting fouls).  So the team would be missing an additional 2 free throws per game.

Why in the world you would assume no shooting fouls? A game in which there are 12 one and one's in regulation would be extremely rare - certainly not a reasonable assumption.

But.. if it were to happen, you'd also want to figure in the ability to get an offensive rebound and a better-than-average scoring opportunity thereafter, HEY?

.15 OR% estimate would be fair... as would a 1.2 ppp estimate after an OR on a missed FT.

The flip side of that, Wisconsin in the championship and a top 10 FT shooting team.  Whether it is a good indicator or not, I have no doubt we can all find stats that "prove" or "disprove" their importance.  At the end of the day, the task at hand is to score more than the opponent.  Shooting a high FT% will equate to more points and more point opportunities (making the bonuses). 

There are certainly more important stats, but cashing in on free point opportunities is one that many (not all) good teams take advantage of.

No. Run historical correlations of shooting a high FT% to offensive efficiency (or worse yet, "more points").

Not sure becky was a top 10 FT shooting team last season (against D-I comp, definitely not)... but so what? You're picking and choosing stats -- and one that matters very little vs. others.

Two years ago they get knocked out in the final four... they went 19/20 from the line in that loss to Kentucky.. the Wildcats were 14/21. yawn.

This past year Duke GOT TO THE LINE 2x for every becky attempt. That's far more important (but less so than Duke simply shooting the ball (eFG%) better)..

Worrying about team FT% is silly.

Free throws are not free points.

And Luke doesn't need to dramatically improve his FT% in order to be good this year.

...you can have a differing opinion, but you know the drill....
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MU82 on September 09, 2015, 10:13:31 PM
Hey, if announcers and coaches can say "score the ball," Chicos hereby has the right to say "free points."

I coach, and if I ever say "score the ball" in practice, I will drop and do 25 pushups.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MUHoopsFan2 on September 10, 2015, 12:11:56 AM
What are you talking about? Luke Fischer was used and he played great. I loved how they used him. Henry Ellenson is the guy who can hit the 15ft jumper. They do not need both of them to.

No. Wojo and his staff are using him right. He can work on that later. The way their team is made he is best utilized down on the block and with the jump hooks and all.

I don't get your question at all...maybe if you rephrase it better. I don't see any problem at all with how he is using him from what we saw in those 4 games. 
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MUHoopsFan2 on September 10, 2015, 12:25:27 AM
I would expect us to play at a more rapid pace this year as we have more horses.  Couple that with Luke being healthy there is a good chance he will get to the line more often, so that the importance of FT% will ramp out. 

I get JB's point that even if you factor in all of that the difference between 70% and 58% isn't going to be more than a point a game and a lot of things are more likely to improve our W/L % than that.  I also that the biggest thing Luke can do to help us win is to up that defensive rebounding percentage.  Even from a psychological/coaching standpoint, giving up second chance points are more painful than leaving points at the FT line, IMO.
Wrong. This team in how they want to play and how teams will defend them will get to the line as much or more as an MU team in recent memory.

They are going to have to hit free throws under 2 minutes in the game. We are reading too much into the 4 games with the free throws but it is important.

The difference between 70% and 58% is more than 1pt man! Are you kidding me?

It is as much as a 5-9 pts difference. If you are not hitting those FT's it get mental and effects your aggressively overall in guys not wanting to go to the line.

They begin running from the ball late in games like alot of the players we have had in here in the last 7 years that I have overlooked to call out. 

But it will be crucial for a team like this. And being in his second year in his regime here those are the little things Wojo will have to emphasis and I sure he will if they lose a game due to the lack of that discipline...
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 10, 2015, 08:49:11 AM
OK, some think it is a stupid phrase, that doesn't change the fact that a lot of coaches, players, etc, use that stupid phrase....just like I said.   They are free points to be had.  It's a shot, no one guarding you, same shot every time...15 feet away.  To each their own

Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: bilsu on September 10, 2015, 09:33:28 AM
Looking at last year's Big East regular season game by game stats. In the fourteen losses there were five games that we missed more free throws than the losing margin. Of course game management would of changed as the score changed, but there was the potential for 5 more wins based on free throw shooting alone. This does not include the OT loss to Georgetown where we lost by 10, but only missed 6 free throws. Obviously, making one more free throw in regulation could of meant a win there. That is 6 potential wins. I think it is reasonable to assume that we could of won three of those (especially the two overtime games), if we were not a mediocre free throw shooting team last year.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on September 10, 2015, 09:36:32 AM
Looking at last year's Big East regular season game by game stats. In the fourteen losses there were five games that we missed more free throws than the losing margin. Of course game management would of changed as the score changed, but there was the potential for 5 more wins based on free throw shooting alone. This does not include the OT loss to Georgetown where we lost by 10, but only missed 6 free throws. Obviously, making one more free throw in regulation could of meant a win there. That is 6 potential wins. I think it is reasonable to assume that we could of won three of those (especially the two overtime games), if we were not a mediocre free throw shooting team last year.

But how many free throws did the opposing team miss in those games?  It goes both ways.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: CTWarrior on September 10, 2015, 09:49:14 AM
The difference between 70% and 58% is more than 1pt man! Are you kidding me?

I think you misinterpreted a bunch of what I said.  I said we will go to the line more often than last year because we are going to pick up the pace.

And as this topic is specifically about Fischer, I am referring specifically to Fischer when I say it is no more than one point a game.  A 12% difference in FT shooting for an individual player will amount to a point a game for that player only if he takes a little more than 8 FT a game.  I doubt Fischer will be taking more than that, so 1 point/game is about the max benefit is Fischer shoots 70% vs 58%.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: bilsu on September 10, 2015, 09:56:48 AM
But how many free throws did the opposing team miss in those games?  It goes both ways.
In our first loss to Georgetown 59-66 that is not included in those six losses we made 8-12, but Georgetown made 23-28. I am assuming at the end of the game we were fouling Georgetown and by the stats they were making those critical free throws.
During the Big East regular season we made 196 free throws and our opponents made 244 for a deficit of 48 points or 2.67 points per game. One of Buzz's favorite statistics was making more free throws than the other team attempted. Last year's Big East season we made more than the other team attempted twice and went 1-1 in those games. There were two games where we made as many free throws as the other team attempted and we won both of those games. In four games we made as many or more as the opponents attempts and we went 3-1. We went 1-13 in games we made less than the opponents attempted.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: wadesworld on September 10, 2015, 10:16:15 AM
In our first loss to Georgetown 59-66 that is not included in those six losses we made 8-12, but Georgetown made 23-28. I am assuming at the end of the game we were fouling Georgetown and by the stats they were making those critical free throws.
During the Big East regular season we made 196 free throws and our opponents made 244 for a deficit of 48 points or 2.67 points per game. One of Buzz's favorite statistics was making more free throws than the other team attempted. Last year's Big East season we made more than the other team attempted twice and went 1-1 in those games. There were two games where we made as many free throws as the other team attempted and we won both of those games. In four games we made as many or more as the opponents attempts and we went 3-1. We went 1-13 in games we made less than the opponents attempted.

But you specifically said that we had X amount of games where we missed more free throws than we lost by, so we would've had a chance to win the games had we made all our free throws.  Sure, but I'm guessing our opponent also missed some free throws in those games, so it goes both ways.

In the Georgetown game you reference as not counting because we went to OT, we missed 4 FTs and they missed 5, so in reality, instead of us winning in regulation had we just made our free throws, they would've won had neither team missed any free throws.

In just about every single digit loss in college basketball most teams will be able to say, "If we were perfect from the line we make up the difference and might win that game."  Sure.  But the other team wasn't perfect from the line either.  These things even out.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MU82 on September 10, 2015, 10:21:22 AM
Wow. Lots of arguments about semantics and fancy stats.

Just make the FTs, dammit!
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: bilsu on September 10, 2015, 10:22:04 AM
The other thing I looked at as long as I was looking at the statistics to back up my impression that last year's team improved at a slower rate compared to the other Big East teams was the net point differential. I realize that Carlino's concussion should of had an effect on these numbers. I divided the season in half by taking the score differential the first time we played a team and then the second time we played the same team. The first nine our total differential was a -39 points and the second time our total differential was a -83 points. Basically we were 44 pints worse the second time around. However, if you remove DePaul and Seton Hall from these figures, because those two teams simply tanked in the second half the differentials go from a -26 to -96. This trend I am expecting to change this year with the young talent we have.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: bilsu on September 10, 2015, 10:26:34 AM
But you specifically said that we had X amount of games where we missed more free throws than we lost by, so we would've had a chance to win the games had we made all our free throws.  Sure, but I'm guessing our opponent also missed some free throws in those games, so it goes both ways.

In the Georgetown game you reference as not counting because we went to OT, we missed 4 FTs and they missed 5, so in reality, instead of us winning in regulation had we just made our free throws, they would've won had neither team missed any free throws.

In just about every single digit loss in college basketball most teams will be able to say, "If we were perfect from the line we make up the difference and might win that game."  Sure.  But the other team wasn't perfect from the line either.  These things even out.
The discussion is about the effect of our free throw shooting improving. On the flip side our opponents free throw shooting could decline. I would argue the most important free throw stat is free throws attempted, because the more free throws you shoot the more likely the other team has foul troubles.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole on September 10, 2015, 10:26:43 AM
But you specifically said that we had X amount of games where we missed more free throws than we lost by, so we would've had a chance to win the games had we made all our free throws.  Sure, but I'm guessing our opponent also missed some free throws in those games, so it goes both ways.

In the Georgetown game you reference as not counting because we went to OT, we missed 4 FTs and they missed 5, so in reality, instead of us winning in regulation had we just made our free throws, they would've won had neither team missed any free throws.

In just about every single digit loss in college basketball most teams will be able to say, "If we were perfect from the line we make up the difference and might win that game."  Sure.  But the other team wasn't perfect from the line either.  These things even out.


Not only that, but it is an unrealistic expectation for teams to make *every* free throw. 

Saying "free throws are important," and then extrapolating how many additional games you won if they would have been 100% is pretty useless.  Why not say "make every FG," or "grab every rebound?"  If you did either of those, you would be pretty much guaranteed to win.

I think there is this thought that free throws should be easy.  No one is playing defense right?  But they aren't necessarily so - that is why FT% hasn't changed.  This is why the "free points" adage is dumb. 
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole on September 10, 2015, 10:34:17 AM
The discussion is about the effect of our free throw shooting improving. On the flip side our opponents free throw shooting could decline. I would argue the most important free throw stat is free throws attempted, because the more free throws you shoot the more likely the other team has foul troubles.


FTA are way more important.  Put it this way, if every possession ended in a 58% Luke Fischer shooting FTs, you are going to have 1.16 points per possession.  Last year that would have been the fifth most efficient offense in the country.  (Of course I didn't include missing front ends of one and ones in that equation, but I think the point is clear.)
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: bilsu on September 10, 2015, 10:42:57 AM

Not only that, but it is an unrealistic expectation for teams to make *every* free throw. 

Saying "free throws are important," and then extrapolating how many additional games you won if they would have been 100% is pretty useless.  Why not say "make every FG," or "grab every rebound?"  If you did either of those, you would be pretty much guaranteed to win.

I think there is this thought that free throws should be easy.  No one is playing defense right?  But they aren't necessarily so - that is why FT% hasn't changed.  This is why the "free points" adage is dumb.
There are games where we have shot extremely well from the line and lost and there are games that we have shot very bad from the line and won. However, a team that shoots 73% from the line vs. a team that shoots 67% has a better chance of winning. The overall point is that making free throws is very important in a close game and to argue otherwise does not make sense.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole on September 10, 2015, 10:53:23 AM
There are games where we have shot extremely well from the line and lost and there are games that we have shot very bad from the line and won. However, a team that shoots 73% from the line vs. a team that shoots 67% has a better chance of winning. The overall point is that making free throws is very important in a close game and to argue otherwise does not make sense.


The initial argument was how much impact team FT% has on the success of a team when it comes to wins and losses.  And as it turns out, increasing FT% by 10 percentage points statistically doesn't have much of an impact.

But your argument seems to be "increasing FT% is better than not increasing FT%."  And that is of course very obvious.  But that's not what was originally argued.  And not as easy as it sounds.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: WarriorInNYC on September 10, 2015, 10:56:33 AM
The other thing I looked at as long as I was looking at the statistics to back up my impression that last year's team improved at a slower rate compared to the other Big East teams was the net point differential. I realize that Carlino's concussion should of had an effect on these numbers. I divided the season in half by taking the score differential the first time we played a team and then the second time we played the same team. The first nine our total differential was a -39 points and the second time our total differential was a -83 points. Basically we were 44 pints worse the second time around. However, if you remove DePaul and Seton Hall from these figures, because those two teams simply tanked in the second half the differentials go from a -26 to -96. This trend I am expecting to change this year with the young talent we have.
I'm really not sure this should be looked into too much.  One thing you'd have to factor in is home/away games.  The second item, this was Wojo's first year and Luke came on just before the conference season.  I would expect most teams would be able to adjust more to us as the season progressed as they have tape on Wojo's offense/defense as well as the new center.  As opposed to scouting from our end, the tape wouldn't have changed much from previous years
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: WarriorInNYC on September 10, 2015, 11:00:26 AM
There are games where we have shot extremely well from the line and lost and there are games that we have shot very bad from the line and won. However, a team that shoots 73% from the line vs. a team that shoots 67% has a better chance of winning. The overall point is that making free throws is very important in a close game and to argue otherwise does not make sense.

Yes, a team that shoots 73% has a better chance at winning a game than a team that shoots 67%.  But by how much?

5 FTs - .3 points difference
10 FTs - .6 points difference
15 FTs - .9 points difference
20 FTs - 1.2 points difference
25 FTs - 1.5 points difference
30 FTs - 1.8 points difference
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on September 10, 2015, 11:13:05 AM
Yes, a team that shoots 73% has a better chance at winning a game than a team that shoots 67%.  But by how much?

5 FTs - .3 points difference
10 FTs - .6 points difference
15 FTs - .9 points difference
20 FTs - 1.2 points difference
25 FTs - 1.5 points difference
30 FTs - 1.8 points difference

False. Missed FT's can be rebounded by the shooting team.

Some of the comments in this thread are so stupid I can barely keep the puke from flying. C'mon now Market

Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: WarriorInNYC on September 10, 2015, 12:02:10 PM
False. Missed FT's can be rebounded by the shooting team.

Some of the comments in this thread are so stupid I can barely keep the puke from flying. C'mon now Market

Ok, so then using your previous .15 OR% and a 1.2 ppp after a missed FT you previously gave, then the point differential is as such:

5 FTs - .246 points difference
10 FTs - .492 points difference
15 FTs - .738 points difference
20 FTs - .984 points difference
25 FTs - 1.23 points difference
30 FTs - 1.476 points difference

Hope this helps keep the puke in.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: bilsu on September 10, 2015, 04:07:28 PM
I'm really not sure this should be looked into too much.  One thing you'd have to factor in is home/away games.  The second item, this was Wojo's first year and Luke came on just before the conference season.  I would expect most teams would be able to adjust more to us as the season progressed as they have tape on Wojo's offense/defense as well as the new center.  As opposed to scouting from our end, the tape wouldn't have changed much from previous years
I think you are saying the other teams were more successful adjusting than MU was. Therefore they improved more than MU. As far as home and away it balances out, since we played each team home and away. I see two things that were not coaching related that could account for the worse numbers the second time around. Carlino's concussion and I think as the season wore on Fisher's shoulder became more of an issue. Yes, teams had time to adjust to him, but I think it was more related to his shoulder getting worse.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: 4everwarriors on September 10, 2015, 04:10:27 PM
But how many free throws did the opposing team miss in those games?  It goes both ways.



Coach Tom Crean had the team work diligently on opposing team free throw defense, hey?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: bilsu on September 10, 2015, 04:12:04 PM
False. Missed FT's can be rebounded by the shooting team.

Some of the comments in this thread are so stupid I can barely keep the puke from flying. C'mon now Market
I think we should just track this season and see how many games are decided by free throws one way or another.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole on September 10, 2015, 04:34:28 PM
I think we should just track this season and see how many games are decided by free throws one way or another.


How would you determine this?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on September 10, 2015, 05:06:48 PM
I think we should just track this season and see how many games are decided by free throws one way or another.

This is just more buffoonery. What is your methodology to determine that a game has been decided by free throws?

And, if applicable based on your methodology, why wait to track the upcoming season when there is plenty of past data to analyze?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: bilsu on September 10, 2015, 10:06:15 PM
There have been plenty of games throughout the years that free throws become very important in the last minute.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on September 10, 2015, 10:15:28 PM
There have been plenty of games throughout the years that free throws become very important in the last minute.

Let's stay on the topic of team FT%
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 11, 2015, 08:57:05 AM
False. Missed FT's can be rebounded by the shooting team.

Some of the comments in this thread are so stupid I can barely keep the puke from flying. C'mon now Market


SOME missed FT's can be rebounded by the shooting team. 
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole on September 11, 2015, 09:24:23 AM
There have been plenty of games throughout the years that free throws become very important in the last minute.

But if one team misses last minute FTs, blows a lead, and loses a game, that doesn't mean that game was "decided by free throws."  What if that team blew an easy lay-up at the three minute mark?  Or didn't grab a key rebound?  What if they were 14/15 from the line until the last minute?

Games are won and lost due to a variety of factors over the course of 40 minutes. You can't isolate the last minute and say what happened then was the most important part of the game.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 11, 2015, 09:30:05 AM
But if one team misses last minute FTs, blows a lead, and loses a game, that doesn't mean that game was "decided by free throws."  What if that team blew an easy lay-up at the three minute mark?  Or didn't grab a key rebound?  What if they were 14/15 from the line until the last minute?

Games are won and lost due to a variety of factors over the course of 40 minutes. You can't isolate the last minute and say what happened then was the most important part of the game.

Correct...every play counts.  Of course, that also means every miss FT, every missed FG, rebound, etc.  All little pieces of the overall outcome.  And each action of success or failure leads to another reaction....for example if we make two FT's instead of missing the front end of a 1 and 1, that may cause the other team to react differently (take a 3, instead of a 2).  So we agree, it is way too complex to say just one area decides the ultimate outcome of the game.

However, I think most people here would agree that shooting a better FT%, assuming the same average number of FTA, NORMALLY is a good thing and will help your chances of winning.  Nothing set in stone, of course just because you shoot a higher FT% doesn't mean the FG% is the same, etc, etc.   My assumption is most people that are claiming a FT% improvement will help a team win are doing so with the concept that nothing else changes.  That's a bit of a reach because other things do change, but that's what they are saying IMO.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: g0lden3agle on September 11, 2015, 09:46:27 AM

SOME missed FT's can be rebounded by the shooting team.

ALL missed FT's can be rebounded by the shooting team.  Statistically they all won't be, but they all could be.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Lennys Tap on September 11, 2015, 09:49:55 AM

SOME missed FT's can be rebounded by the shooting team.

No. ALL missed FT's can be rebounded by the shooting team. SOME usually are. (Sorry, g0lden beat me to it).
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Spotcheck Billy on September 11, 2015, 10:06:24 AM
Poor Luke Fischer, his thread derailed for this FT bullsh!t.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 11, 2015, 10:14:05 AM
ALL missed FT's can be rebounded by the shooting team.  Statistically they all won't be, but they all could be.

If a player is shooting two free throws and the first one is missed, nothing happens.  Only the second free throw miss can be rebounded.

 :)
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on September 11, 2015, 10:37:59 AM
If a player is shooting two free throws and the first one is missed, nothing happens.  Only the second free throw miss can be rebounded.

 :)

You're all wrong. "Nothing happens" isn't true - in fact, a rebound is credited (to the shooting team).

Dead-ball rebound.

Please see A.R. 2. of the Statistucians' Manual.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: bilsu on September 11, 2015, 11:22:57 AM
But if one team misses last minute FTs, blows a lead, and loses a game, that doesn't mean that game was "decided by free throws."  What if that team blew an easy lay-up at the three minute mark?  Or didn't grab a key rebound?  What if they were 14/15 from the line until the last minute?

Games are won and lost due to a variety of factors over the course of 40 minutes. You can't isolate the last minute and say what happened then was the most important part of the game.
Here is an example what you are referring to. I was at this game in 1969 at the old UW Fieldhouse. MU is down one with little time remaining and Ric Cobb a 50% free throw shooter is fouled. Cobb makes the first and misses the second and the game goes into overtime. He misses both we lose in regulation and if he makes both we win in regulation. We lost in overtime when McGuire decides it is better for his senior star George Thompson to bring up the ball instead of his sophomore point guard Dean Meminger. Although Meminger was probably the best ball handler ever to attend MU, McGuire thought it was too much pressure for a sophomore. Thompson got the ball stolen and Rick Mount then hit the jump shot to win the game to go to final four. Did we lose because Cobb missed a free throw or because Mount hit the game winner. My answer is we lost because McGuire made a stupid decision at a crucial time. Of course he would not of made that decision, if Cobb made both free throws.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: bilsu on September 11, 2015, 11:37:11 AM
Another example it was Raymonds' first loss as head coach. MU is down 1 at Louisville and Butch Lee is fouled with virtually no time to go. Lee, a good free throw shooter, misses both free throws and we lose. Sure there were probably dozens of other plays during the game that could of changed that close loss to a win, but you will never be able to convince me that missed free throws did not cost us that game.

Or how about our game against Georgetown when James fouls a Georgetown player on a potential tying three point shot. Player makes all three free throws to send game into overtime where we lose.

How about the loss to Louisville that directly resulted by a dead ball foul by Amoroso when we were shooting free throws.

I could go on and on. I been going to games before most of you were born and have had my heart broken many times by free throws either missed by us or made by the other team.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: DoggyDaddy on September 11, 2015, 11:45:48 AM
Rick Mount was from Purdue but that game was played in Wisconsin. Purdue University is in Indiana. Luke Fischer played at Indiana University. Then he transferred to Marquette University which is in Wisconsin. Ric Cobb was a center and an outstanding rebounder for MU but he was not much of shooter. Luke Fischer is a very good rebounder and a much better shooter.
We are now back on track and off the damn FT line in this thread, I hope.       
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole on September 11, 2015, 12:46:55 PM
Here is an example what you are referring to. I was at this game in 1969 at the old UW Fieldhouse. MU is down one with little time remaining and Ric Cobb a 50% free throw shooter is fouled. Cobb makes the first and misses the second and the game goes into overtime. He misses both we lose in regulation and if he makes both we win in regulation. We lost in overtime when McGuire decides it is better for his senior star George Thompson to bring up the ball instead of his sophomore point guard Dean Meminger. Although Meminger was probably the best ball handler ever to attend MU, McGuire thought it was too much pressure for a sophomore. Thompson got the ball stolen and Rick Mount then hit the jump shot to win the game to go to final four. Did we lose because Cobb missed a free throw or because Mount hit the game winner. My answer is we lost because McGuire made a stupid decision at a crucial time. Of course he would not of made that decision, if Cobb made both free throws.


But I can say that this games wasn't "decided by free throws."  It was decided by any number of factors that you mention.

Look, better FT shooting is better than not better FT shooting.  Everyone knows that.  But it simply isn't easy for a team to suddenly become better at FT.  That is why the stat remains unchanged by and large for the past few decades.

Good discussion though.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Spotcheck Billy on September 11, 2015, 01:09:45 PM
You're all wrong. "Nothing happens" isn't true - in fact, a rebound is credited (to the shooting team).

Dead-ball rebound.

Please see A.R. 2. of the Statistucians' Manual.

Is that anything like the Statisticians' Manual?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Henry Sugar on September 11, 2015, 01:38:34 PM
FT%/FTR are about 5% important. It matters in close games when the other 95% are basically equal between teams.

Back to Luke Fischer, here's a question. Last year, he was slightly above average offensively (ORtg of 105) and slightly below average as an on-court contributor (19%). Would you rather see him develop this year as an improved offensive player with less on-court contributions (Ortg of 115, usage of 19%), or would you rather see him stay as a slightly above average player with increased on-court contribution (Ortg of 105, usage of 23-25%)?

More efficient, or a bigger role? You can only pick one.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: mug644 on September 11, 2015, 02:17:17 PM
FT%/FTR are about 5% important. It matters in close games when the other 95% are basically equal between teams.

Back to Luke Fischer, here's a question. Last year, he was slightly above average offensively (ORtg of 105) and slightly below average as an on-court contributor (19%). Would you rather see him develop this year as an improved offensive player with less on-court contributions (Ortg of 115, usage of 19%), or would you rather see him stay as a slightly above average player with increased on-court contribution (Ortg of 105, usage of 23-25%)?

More efficient, or a bigger role? You can only pick one.

Good to try to get this back on track. For me, I would like to see Luke be more efficient. Being more efficient opens up the game for other players, as it puts more pressure on the opponent's interior defense.

That said, I'll be surprised if both efficiency and usage don't improve, at least marginally. He's over his injury, he has Henry to take a lot of attention away from him, and he has guards that seem better both shooting and getting the ball into him.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on September 11, 2015, 02:53:58 PM
We don't need him to have higher usage. We have more options this season. Definitely would rather see his efficiency improve
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: brewcity77 on September 11, 2015, 03:38:26 PM
The difference between 70% and 58% is more than 1pt man! Are you kidding me?

It is as much as a 5-9 pts difference. If you are not hitting those FT's it get mental and effects your aggressively overall in guys not wanting to go to the line.

If we're going to call out dumb comments, how did this little gem not get any response? 9 points difference? NINE points? Are you on crack? In order to have a NINE point disparity based on a 12% point difference in free throw percentage in a single game, the team would have to shoot 75 free throws in that game. That's...

...SEVENTY-FIVE FREE THROWS IN ONE GAME!!!

So yeah...before you make any more stupid statements, how about checking your math at the door? Seriously...75 FTAs? For the record, the most COMBINED free throws by both teams in a single game is 105. That was between Morehead State and Iowa in 1953.

Nine point swing...dude, please. The highest FTA total we had in a game last year was 34 against Georgia Tech. A 12% conversion difference in that game would have amounted to 4 points. So even in our maximum FTA game last year, we didn't reach the 5 point minimum difference you claim, nor come remotely close to the 9 point maximum difference you list.

On an average night, 12% points will make a difference of 0-4 points. Rarely will it ever matter more than that, and never under any circumstance will it 12% points ever amount to 9 points on the scoreboard. Never.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Galway Eagle on September 11, 2015, 03:50:28 PM
Let's keep arguing this all year maybe it'll make the meme tournament next summer!
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Henry Sugar on September 11, 2015, 03:55:49 PM
We don't need him to have higher usage. We have more options this season. Definitely would rather see his efficiency improve

Playing devil's advocate here, but 55% of the possessions from last year either graduated or left.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on September 11, 2015, 04:08:20 PM
Playing devil's advocate here, but 55% of the possessions from last year either graduated or left.

I agree and that's why I've been down on this team all summer. Maybe it was the Italy trip, maybe it's fall blue and gold glasses but I'm becoming more optimistic. I feel like we have upgrades at most positions...at least on the offensive side.

PG: Carter > Derrick
SG: SO Duane > FR Duane
SF:  SO Sandy <  Carlino
PF: Henry > Juan
C:  JR Luke > SO Luke
6th Man: JR JJJ > SO JJJ

Defensively, I think this team is slightly worse. But I think it will be much better offensively abd overall. Ergo, I want more offensive efficiency rather than usage from Luke
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: brandx on September 11, 2015, 04:40:37 PM
I agree and that's why I've been down on this team all summer. Maybe it was the Italy trip, maybe it's fall blue and gold glasses but I'm becoming more optimistic. I feel like we have upgrades at most positions...at least on the offensive side.

PG: Carter > Derrick
SG: SO Duane > FR Duane
SF:  SO Sandy <  Carlino
PF: Henry > Juan
C:  JR Luke > SO Luke
6th Man: JR JJJ > SO JJJ

Defensively, I think this team is slightly worse. But I think it will be much better offensively abd overall. Ergo, I want more offensive efficiency rather than usage from Luke

That's the same way I looked at it.

Plus the bench should be better.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on September 11, 2015, 07:55:58 PM
Playing devil's advocate here, but 55% of the possessions from last year either graduated or left.

Yes, but Carlino was the only higher (medium-high, I'd call it) usage guy and we add someone in Ellenson who I project to exceed Carlino in usage this year.

Cohen at 15.6 as a freshman figures to increase, albeit only a bit (I'd go with 17.2% to 18.x%)... and I don't care where the PG minutes go - they shouldn't be lower than Derrick's poss and certainly not his %Shots.

Not ready to answer your question today, but thinking on the go here re: a potential starting lineup...

Traci - 18%
Duane - 25%
Sandy - 18%
Henry - 28%
...would bring you to 89% usage before Luke, implying 11%.

With Duane and Henry figuring to get a lot of minutes and be high-usage players, the need for Luke to be up there is smaller... I think there are games and matchups where we should be going to him early and often.. a 30% game here and there may be reasonable to desire... but, the "need"... 18 to 22% may be the range that I'm OK with for him when on the court with 'the regulars' whoever they are... assuming two of them are Duane and Henry
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 11, 2015, 11:16:47 PM
You're all wrong. "Nothing happens" isn't true - in fact, a rebound is credited (to the shooting team).

Dead-ball rebound.

Please see A.R. 2. of the Statistucians' Manual.

OK, fair enough.  I was going for team or individual rebounds since it is a dead ball.  I have no idea why the rule book counts that particular play as a dead ball rebound since the team doesn't gain possession of it and the opposing team still has the ball (for the 2nd or 3rd free throw), but that is the rule.

Thank you for the clarification.   

I would note, dead ball rebounds are not counted by the NCAA in statistical rankings as part of the team rrebounding number.  (Section 3, Article 1, subsection d)
 
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Jay Bee on September 11, 2015, 11:53:56 PM
OK, fair enough.  I was going for team or individual rebounds since it is a dead ball.  I have no idea why the rule book counts that particular play as a dead ball rebound since the team doesn't gain possession of it and the opposing team still has the ball (for the 2nd or 3rd free throw), but that is the rule.

Thank you for the clarification.   

I would note, dead ball rebounds are not counted by the NCAA in statistical rankings as part of the team rrebounding number.  (Section 3, Article 1, subsection d)

^^^^^
"I was wrong" in chicos land
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: classof2k on September 12, 2015, 01:00:14 AM
Is the season here yet?
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MUDPT on September 12, 2015, 08:46:30 AM
FT%/FTR are about 5% important. It matters in close games when the other 95% are basically equal between teams.

Back to Luke Fischer, here's a question. Last year, he was slightly above average offensively (ORtg of 105) and slightly below average as an on-court contributor (19%). Would you rather see him develop this year as an improved offensive player with less on-court contributions (Ortg of 115, usage of 19%), or would you rather see him stay as a slightly above average player with increased on-court contribution (Ortg of 105, usage of 23-25%)?

More efficient, or a bigger role? You can only pick one.

Can he be the same?  That's where I see him.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: MUDPT on September 12, 2015, 08:54:07 AM
Real question: What do folks think Luke's rebounding percentages can be this year?

With the broken wing a year ago, he was at 6.8% and 12.8%. In limited time at I4, he was 11.1% and 12.6%.

I'd *like* to see OR% at 9%+ and DR% approaching 17%+... a DR% of less than 15% would not be pleasing.

I'll say OR at 9%, but DR only increases to 14%.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: brewcity77 on September 12, 2015, 09:04:36 AM
FT%/FTR are about 5% important. It matters in close games when the other 95% are basically equal between teams.

Back to Luke Fischer, here's a question. Last year, he was slightly above average offensively (ORtg of 105) and slightly below average as an on-court contributor (19%). Would you rather see him develop this year as an improved offensive player with less on-court contributions (Ortg of 115, usage of 19%), or would you rather see him stay as a slightly above average player with increased on-court contribution (Ortg of 105, usage of 23-25%)?

More efficient, or a bigger role? You can only pick one.

More efficient, no question whatsoever. Because if he improves his efficiency and the offense still only goes through him as a third or fourth option, that likely means options 1 and 2 are better (presumably Duane and Henry).

Granted, that doesn't automatically mean they will be higher than 115 ORtg, but I'd happily take Duane with 27% usage and an ORtg of 108, Henry with 24% usage and an ORtg of around 105, and Luke at 115 as the third highest in terms of usage.

Figure Sandy and Traci combining for roughly 30% usage. I think that's a pretty good mix.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: Silkk the Shaka on September 12, 2015, 09:15:59 AM
FT%/FTR are about 5% important. It matters in close games when the other 95% are basically equal between teams.

Back to Luke Fischer, here's a question. Last year, he was slightly above average offensively (ORtg of 105) and slightly below average as an on-court contributor (19%). Would you rather see him develop this year as an improved offensive player with less on-court contributions (Ortg of 115, usage of 19%), or would you rather see him stay as a slightly above average player with increased on-court contribution (Ortg of 105, usage of 23-25%)?

More efficient, or a bigger role? You can only pick one.

More efficient, no question for me. I hope he's around the 115 you cited. Duane and Hank should dominate usage (I'm hoping 2012 DJO/Crowder levels at minimum). Luke should be the lifeline when defenses start breaking down. I think he can and will thrive in a role like that.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on September 12, 2015, 10:03:08 AM
^^^^^
"I was wrong" in chicos land

I said thank you for the clarification.   I've admitted to being wrong many many many times here.    Hoping you can post that police report soon that we've all been waiting for.
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: jesmu84 on September 12, 2015, 07:47:25 PM
If we're going to call out dumb comments, how did this little gem not get any response? 9 points difference? NINE points? Are you on crack? In order to have a NINE point disparity based on a 12% point difference in free throw percentage in a single game, the team would have to shoot 75 free throws in that game. That's...

...SEVENTY-FIVE FREE THROWS IN ONE GAME!!!

So yeah...before you make any more stupid statements, how about checking your math at the door? Seriously...75 FTAs? For the record, the most COMBINED free throws by both teams in a single game is 105. That was between Morehead State and Iowa in 1953.

Nine point swing...dude, please. The highest FTA total we had in a game last year was 34 against Georgia Tech. A 12% conversion difference in that game would have amounted to 4 points. So even in our maximum FTA game last year, we didn't reach the 5 point minimum difference you claim, nor come remotely close to the 9 point maximum difference you list.

On an average night, 12% points will make a difference of 0-4 points. Rarely will it ever matter more than that, and never under any circumstance will it 12% points ever amount to 9 points on the scoreboard. Never.

Have you seen this guy/girl's prior posts? Follows a similar pattern of logic. Been on my ignore list for a while as I just couldnt deal with it anymore
Title: Re: Luke Fischer
Post by: brewcity77 on September 12, 2015, 09:41:01 PM
Have you seen this guy/girl's prior posts? Follows a similar pattern of logic. Been on my ignore list for a while as I just couldnt deal with it anymore

I have, but sometimes I just enjoy deconstructing ridiculousness  ;D