Looks like Reinhardt will not start and come off the bench

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

But...it's true with hindsight that 1-n-done's are not good for MU ball. HE showed that. He's a good guy with good intentions but they didn't line up with MU success in the long run. If another guy like that shows up that wants to come here....maybe the bluegrass is best for all...

No its not 'true'. 

[muwarrior69]

Kid was in the deep end of the pool.

I think Rowsey may be in there as well.

[GGGG]

Monday morning quarterbacking Henry Ellenson is the Scoopiest thing ever.

[Lennys Tap]

You are still shifting those goal posts. You used Hank's "shooting 3s at will" to show he was a ball hog, poorly coached, or both. He obviously didn't "shoot 3s at will."

Also you clearly have a great offensive scheme in mind. We have Luke who is obviously going to be on the blocks offensively, we have a team that needs to get to the rim to score because they can't shoot, and you also think Hank should be plotting himself on the block the entire game because you don't think his 10 easy rebounds per game are enough. Genius. Talk about making things easy for the defense...

Guess you've never seen Bill Self's high/low offense with 2 bigs. Not surprised. Nothing surprises me from a guy who thinks it's wise to green light our worst 3 point shooter to the point where he's second on the team in attempts rather than keeping him within 17 feet from the basket where he's effective. Henry could have been a great college player but he was more concerned with showing NBA scouts he could play the stretch 4 since it was his only NBA position. Wojo went along with it because even with Henry shooting too much from long range we were better than we would have been without HE. I think that sets a bad precedent for a coach. Give me guys who will play outside of their NBA position for the betterment of the team (Lazar, Jae and others) any day.

[Lennys Tap]

And yet he lead the BE in rebounding.  It must have only been the rebounds that bounced out 25 feet.

Thanks for making my point. Best rebounder in the league and one of the league's worst 3 point shooters. Do you want him want him on the perimeter as your 2nd highest volume 3 point shooter or closer to the basket where you can benefit from his skill?

[Mr. Sand-Knit]

Mu was at it best last year when luke was in foul trouble n we played 4 guards around henry.  Go back n watch the games n it wasnt even close.  We were at our worst when they were in there to gether with henry playing the 4 and chucking 3s. 
Even with our poor shhoting perimeter players last year if we had alternated henry n luke like we r this year with heldt n luke we would of been a much better team imho.
Henry is a talent but even a great talent can be detrimental if he plays out of position. 

[Loose Cannon]

Touché - point TSmith34

But...it's true with hindsight that 1-n-done's are not good for MU ball. HE showed that. He's a good guy with good intentions but they didn't line up with MU success in the long run. If another guy like that shows up that wants to come here....maybe the bluegrass is best for all...

But the question I ask is how did the Bluebloods become Bluebloods.  Did they change their recruiting formula or has it's been so long we forgot it ever happen?

[GGGG]

But the question I ask is how did the Bluebloods become Bluebloods.  Did they change their recruiting formula or has it's been so long we forgot it ever happen?

Hire a good coach.  Keep him around.  When that coach leaves, replace him with a good coach.  Earn and devote a lot of resources to the basketball program in the meantime.

I'm not calling Wisconsin a "blue blood," but that right there is how you build a program from nothing. 

[wadesworld]

Guess you've never seen Bill Self's high/low offense with 2 bigs. Not surprised. Nothing surprises me from a guy who thinks it's wise to green light our worst 3 point shooter to the point where he's second on the team in attempts rather than keeping him within 17 feet from the basket where he's effective. Henry could have been a great college player but he was more concerned with showing NBA scouts he could play the stretch 4 since it was his only NBA position. Wojo went along with it because even with Henry shooting too much from long range we were better than we would have been without HE. I think that sets a bad precedent for a coach. Give me guys who will play outside of their NBA position for the betterment of the team (Lazar, Jae and others) any day.

OH! So now it's no longer under the basket where he can do what he does best (grab easy rebounds) it's now a high low game with him 3 feet further in than where you're complaining he was too far away from the basket to grab all those easy rebounds. 20 feet away he can't be at his best grabbing rebounds, 17 feet out he's great. Got it!

Goal posts: shifted.

[wadesworld]

Thanks for making my point. Best rebounder in the league and one of the league's worst 3 point shooters. Do you want him want him on the perimeter as your 2nd highest volume 3 point shooter or closer to the basket where you can benefit from his skill?

Which is it? Literally your last post talks about wanting Hank as part of a high low offense 17 feet from the basket. So do you want him where you can "benefit from his skill" (which you stated is his rebounding) or do you want him 17 feet from the hoop in a high low offense?

Hank really hauled in those 17 foot boards well last year I guess.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

But...it's true with hindsight that 1-n-done's are not good for MU ball. HE showed that. He's a good guy with good intentions but they didn't line up with MU success in the long run. If another guy like that shows up that wants to come here....maybe the bluegrass is best for all...

I'm not sure that I would draw that conclusion.  Why wouldn't we want to be considered an institution that guys with the talent to be one-and-dones come to?  I suspect Wojo uses Henry getting to the NBA after one year as a positive part of his recruiting story.

I think that the only way that it negatively affected MU was that Wojo couldn't convince another 4 to come here because they weren't sure when Henry was leaving.  But overall the team appears to be better this year than last, despite losing Henry.  Everyone else on the roster is more experienced and Wojo brought in four more talented guys.

[Jay Bee]

Henry shot poorly last year; he's much better than the numbers say, though. His shot attempts and his 3FGA/FGA was just fine.

The analysis isn't "what is this guy shooting from the field? Oh, it's not good. Therefore, don't let him shoot or don't play him"...

It's "what do I think he can/will do?"

HE was better than his 3FG% showed. KR is better than his eFG% has shown thus far.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Thanks for making my point.

Actually, it's in direct opposition to your point(s) which were that Henry was either selfish or given the green light by Wojo and that he couldn't rebound by playing outside.

Not only did he rebound at an excellent rate, but he shot threes at a lower rate than multiple players on the current team. He also shot slightly fewer threes per game in the second half of the season (3.3 vs. 3.4) and made them at a better-if-still-not-good rate (32.1% vs 25.5%).  Henry's skills probably improved incrementally, but it also suggests that he was more selective in his shots--contradicting the idea that he was a ball hog or that Wojo wanted him to jack up threes regardless.

[Lennys Tap]

OH! So now it's no longer under the basket where he can do what he does best (grab easy rebounds) it's now a high low game with him 3 feet further in than where you're complaining he was too far away from the basket to grab all those easy rebounds. 20 feet away he can't be at his best grabbing rebounds, 17 feet out he's great. Got it!

Goal posts: shifted.

You're illogical, you lie or put words in people's mouth (who ever mentioned easy rebounds?) and you look for fights when its obvious you're wrong. Henry was better playing 17' out or closer (high low double post players alternate high and low - guess you didn't know that) than he was playing22+ feet from the basket. Numbers show that. Wojo let him roam outside much of the time either because he thought it gave us a better chance of winning (the numbers say it didn't) or to help showcase Henry for the NBA. You can take another turn misrepresenting my points - I'm done fighting with you.

[brewcity77]

Well sure if you want to keep shifting goal posts you win.

How dare you shift the goal posts after I spent all this time pushing them across the field?

Comparing Hank's number of attempts with this team is completely disingenuous. First, this team shoots a higher percentage of shots from outside and scores a higher percentage of points from outside. Shooting threes is a much bigger part of the gameplan. Second, Henry shot a notably lower percentage (28.8%) from three than any of the five this year you refer to except Reinhardt, and as his shooting volume, selection, and quality has been discussed ad nauseam, that kind of proves the point about Henry's deep quantity. Third, Henry had a higher eFG% inside the arc and when combining that with his team leading 5.6 fouls drawn per forty minutes, he was FAR better suited to restrict his three point shooting.

Henry took too many threes on a team where threes were less of a focal points and his lack of efficiency was only matched in the past two years by the subject of this thread. Trying to compare Henry's number of three attempts last year when our entire team gameplan this year is to shoot more threes because we have better long range shooters is a fallacious argument and the very definition of goalpost shifting.

[Loose Cannon]

Hire a good coach.  Keep him around.  When that coach leaves, replace him with a good coach.  Earn and devote a lot of resources to the basketball program in the meantime.

I'm not calling Wisconsin a "blue blood," but that right there is how you build a program from nothing.

I agree.

[wadesworld]

How dare you shift the goal posts after I spent all this time pushing them across the field?

Comparing Hank's number of attempts with this team is completely disingenuous. First, this team shoots a higher percentage of shots from outside and scores a higher percentage of points from outside. Shooting threes is a much bigger part of the gameplan. Second, Henry shot a notably lower percentage (28.8%) from three than any of the five this year you refer to except Reinhardt, and as his shooting volume, selection, and quality has been discussed ad nauseam, that kind of proves the point about Henry's deep quantity. Third, Henry had a higher eFG% inside the arc and when combining that with his team leading 5.6 fouls drawn per forty minutes, he was FAR better suited to restrict his three point shooting.

Henry took too many threes on a team where threes were less of a focal points and his lack of efficiency was only matched in the past two years by the subject of this thread. Trying to compare Henry's number of three attempts last year when our entire team gameplan this year is to shoot more threes because we have better long range shooters is a fallacious argument and the very definition of goalpost shifting.

Huh?  Comparing 3 point attempts to...3 point attempts is shifting goal posts?  Wow.  That is an interesting definition of goalpost shifting.

When someone says, "he was allowed to shoot 3 pointers at will!  Horrible coaching!  What a ball hog!"  I don't care who it is or what the percentage that person shoots those 3 pointers.  That statement is entirely about the quantity of shots attempted.

A guy like Novak who shoots 8.4 3 pointers per game his senior year shoots the 3 at will.  A guy like Henry Ellenson who shot 3.2 3 pointers per game his one year at Marquette did not shoot the 3 pointer at will.

Whether Hank or Novak should be shooting the 3 at will is an entirely different argument.  The quantity of 3 pointers is what defines whether someone "shoots the 3 at will," not the quality of the shot or the ability to make those shots.

Was Roosevelt Jones a guy who "shot the 3 at will" because he shot 100% from 3 in his college career?  Of course not.  He went 1/1 on 3 pointers in his career.  It's not quality, it's quantity.

PS eFG% by it's definition includes shots outside the arc.  The equation includes the number of 3 pointers made.

[wadesworld]

You're illogical, you lie or put words in people's mouth (who ever mentioned easy rebounds?) and you look for fights when its obvious you're wrong. Henry was better playing 17' out or closer (high low double post players alternate high and low - guess you didn't know that) than he was playing22+ feet from the basket. Numbers show that. Wojo let him roam outside much of the time either because he thought it gave us a better chance of winning (the numbers say it didn't) or to help showcase Henry for the NBA. You can take another turn misrepresenting my points - I'm done fighting with you.

So you wanted Luke roaming around 17 feet from the basket?  Yeesh.  This offensive gameplan you propose Wojo should've used just sounds worse and worse to me the more you talk about it.

[brewcity77]

Huh?  Comparing 3 point attempts to...3 point attempts is shifting goal posts?  Wow.  That is an interesting definition of goalpost shifting.

PS eFG% by it's definition includes shots outside the arc.  The equation includes the number of 3 pointers made.

To the first, yes it absolutely is shifting the goalposts. Henry took 18.1% of the teams three point attempts. By comparison, our most frequent three point shooter is Sam, who takes 18.2% of the team's attempts. It's a different offense so simply looking at number of attempts is myopic and disingenuous. A 28.8% three point shooter taking that percentage of the attempts is too much and not comparable to anyone this year including the guys that take more quantity. It's effectively a question of tempo.

And duh, however when you compare Henry's efficiency inside the arc, he was far more efficient on those shots he took inside the arc. His higher eFG% on those shots (6.3% higher) demonstrates that he was much better off inside the arc, which is why he shouldn't be taking 18.1% of the team's three point attempts. The only other player on the team that was more efficient inside the arc was Sandy, by a comparably minimal 1.5%.

[wadesworld]

To the first, yes it absolutely is shifting the goalposts. Henry took 18.1% of the teams three point attempts. By comparison, our most frequent three point shooter is Sam, who takes 18.2% of the team's attempts. It's a different offense so simply looking at number of attempts is myopic and disingenuous. A 28.8% three point shooter taking that percentage of the attempts is too much and not comparable to anyone this year including the guys that take more quantity. It's effectively a question of tempo.

And duh, however when you compare Henry's efficiency inside the arc, he was far more efficient on those shots he took inside the arc. His higher eFG% on those shots (6.3% higher) demonstrates that he was much better off inside the arc, which is why he shouldn't be taking 18.1% of the team's three point attempts. The only other player on the team that was more efficient inside the arc was Sandy, by a comparably minimal 1.5%.

Nobody's arguing Hank was better inside the arc. You're going into efficiency (quality) when it really is a statement of attempts (quantity). It's much simpler than what you're trying to make it out to be.

The fact of the matter remains Hank didn't "shoot 3s at will."  No goal post shifting necessary. There was no "shooting 3s at will." Percentages have nothing to do with whether a guy "shot 3s at will or not."

Steph Curry "shoots 3s at will." Klay Thompson "shoots 3s at will." Steve Novak "shot 3s at will." Henry Ellenson? Nope.

[wadesworld]

Also it doesn't matter what the team makeup was. The top X number of players that attempt the most 3 pointers on a given basketball team doesn't define who "shoots the 3 at will." If a team attempts 10 3s a game chances are no more than 1 player is attempting a lot of 3s. If a team attempts 35 there are probably multiple players who attempt quite a few 3s. The 5 players who attempt the most 3s on a team aren't automatically "shooting 3s at will."

[brewcity77]

Also it doesn't matter what the team makeup was. The top X number of players that attempt the most 3 pointers on a given basketball team doesn't define who "shoots the 3 at will." If a team attempts 10 3s a game chances are no more than 1 player is attempting a lot of 3s. If a team attempts 35 there are probably multiple players who attempt quite a few 3s. The 5 players who attempt the most 3s on a team aren't automatically "shooting 3s at will."

If you don't believe in tempo free stats, I suppose. 

[Stretchdeltsig]

Henry would have been a great player as a Junior and Senior.  He was a loose cannon that hurt the team as much as helped it. 

[brewcity77]

Henry would have been a great player as a Junior and Senior.  He was a loose cannon that hurt the team as much as helped it.

I criticized his shot selection as much as anyone, but this just isn't true. He may have cost us two games with his reckless play, but he powered us to at least six wins that we don't get without him.

[wadesworld]

If you don't believe in tempo free stats, I suppose. 

I more don't believe any player who shoots 3.2 3 pointers in 33.5 mpg is "shooting the 3 at will" in today's day and age. To each their own I guess