Deja Vu..... with a revenge chaser.

[Marcus92]

During one of the timeouts they showed on TV, Wojo was exhorting his players to look for the opportunistic offensive rebound, as SHU wasn't blocking out. What does KR do a few minutes later? Amazing what happens when you do what the coach tells you.

On a slightly related note, there was one timeout where Wojo was so upset, he smashed his white board on his lap and someone from the staff had to get him a new one. My seats are in the upper deck, so I couldn't hear anything he was saying — but would have loved to be in that huddle. I don't think anybody can accuse Wojo of a lack of passion.

[Marcus92]

Not Jay Bee, but what's impressed me isn't just the degree of improvement by Haanif (24.4% last year, 13.4% this year), but when he did it. Improving by 11% is massive, especially with no real change in usage. However most of the players I've looked back at don't see their improvements until their junior year.

Considering various 2/3 players for Marquette over the years:

   
• Vander Blue: Fr 22.3 / So 23.0 / Jr 18.6
• Darius Johnson-Odom: So 18.1 / Jr 15.3 / Sr 15.8
• Jerel McNeal: Fr 29.1 / So  25.5 / Jr 19.5 / Sr 17.1
• Wes Matthews: Fr 23.3 / So 20.9 / Jr 16.3 / Sr 16.0

Not a big list, I know. Some guys just stay kind of static (Jimmy and Jae were always exceptional at TORate, some like Mayo and Jamil were always just kind of average) while others wait until their senior year to see the most improvement (Novak and Gardner), but when it came to wings, it usually seemed like if a big jump was in the making, it was usually from sophomore to junior years.

Of everyone I looked at, Cheatham's 11 percentage point jump is the biggest single-year improvement. The closest to that was Gardner's 8.7% improvement from his junior to senior years. Now granted, I only looked at a handful of Marquette players over the past 10-15 years, so my sample size is pretty small, but I am willing to wager that while Cheatham's improvement may not be historic level type stuff, it's still way above the norm.

Great post. Hannif has been a difference-maker. Some, however, will look only at his scoring average or shooting percentage and give him (or the coaching staff) no credit for improving his game.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Fantastic ta have smart broads on dis board who can aren't too priss ta cuss, hey?

I know you are still stuck in the 60s but broad has moved out of favor as an appropriate term for women.

[GGGG]

Of course it is not the only reason they lost - but when you miss 40% of your FTs (and there were lots of fouls called on MU) in what turns out to be a one possession game, it is flat out ignorant to say it has no effect.

You said:  "They lost because they missed too many FTs."

Now you say:  "Of course it is not the only reason they lost."

So which is it?

And no one said "it had no effect."  Everything has an effect.  The issue is how big of an effect in the grand scheme of things

[JakeBarnes]

Also: F the announcers for straight up dissing MU when they said this game was a must win for SHU because MU is at the bottom of the table.  At the end of the year MU will be above SHU on the table.

Marquette is the bottom of the table until they prove otherwise. Three years in this conference and they haven't done a damn thing to say otherwise. You don't magically get respect, you have to earn it.

That said, I believe that this team is starting to earn it. Keep shoring up the defense and it will be even more fun.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

Congrats, dipsh1t!

Jaybee, I think everyone here really appreciates your insights and contribution to this board.

But I don't understand why you always have to stoop to insults.  You do it so quickly.  Relax, brotha.

[brandx]

Great post. Hannif has been a difference-maker. Some, however, will look only at his scoring average or shooting percentage and give him (or the coaching staff) no credit for improving his game.

I agree.

I think those that are down on HC point to that he hasn't improved his shot-making ability.

He still only uses his left-hand and still has no mid-range game.

But, these things take time. He has had several nice assists over the last few games off of his drive, which was something he didn't do last year. It is something the coaches have stressed with him and shows he is putting in the work needed.

[brandx]

You said:  "They lost because they missed too many FTs."

Now you say:  "Of course it is not the only reason they lost."

So which is it?

And no one said "it had no effect."  Everything has an effect.  The issue is how big of an effect in the grand scheme of things

It's both. Seems simple enough to understand.

If Markus hits a buzzer beater the next game, it will be the reason the game is won. That is why the term "game-winner" is used. I would hope that anybody hearing that "Markus hit the game winner" would be smart enough not to discount whatever happened in the previous 39:59 and how all players on the floor affected the outcome.

A simple comparison is Malcolm Butler's interception in the Super Bowl. It was the reason that NE won. If he doesn't make THAT play, they lose . That does not mean that the rest of the game and every play preceding the interception didn't affect the outcome.

I have no argument with any of JB's stats. What I differ with is that a stat tells you everything you need to know.

[cheebs09]

On a slightly related note, there was one timeout where Wojo was so upset, he smashed his white board on his lap and someone from the staff had to get him a new one. My seats are in the upper deck, so I couldn't hear anything he was saying — but would have loved to be in that huddle. I don't think anybody can accuse Wojo of a lack of passion.

One thing I've noticed, and maybe it's because we are a better team, but I feel Wojo has been much better with his body language on the sidelines this year compared to when he started. He would be very demonstrative when we did something negatively. He still does it, but far less frequently and expressive.

I always thought that may have had a negative impact on the team. He is still demonstrative in positive ways and usually one of the first to meet the players on their way to the huddle to fire them up or on a big possession. One of the non x&os way I think he's grown as a coach since he started.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Not Jay Bee, but what's impressed me isn't just the degree of improvement by Haanif (24.4% last year, 13.4% this year), but when he did it. Improving by 11% is massive, especially with no real change in usage. However most of the players I've looked back at don't see their improvements until their junior year.

Thanks Brew.  Great information, that was what I was wondering about.

[MU82]

Free throw percentage is pretty much meaningless. This game proves it.

I will defer to you, JB and the rest of the analytics guys.

Yet even if I 100% agree that FT pct is a meaningless stat, I sure would have liked to have seen Haani ice the game at the end of regulation by making 2 FTs.

Us "old-schoolers" are allowed to say that without being told how stupid we are, right?

[TSmith34, Inc.]

I will defer to you, JB and the rest of the analytics guys.

Yet even if I 100% agree that FT pct is a meaningless stat, I sure would have liked to have seen Haani ice the game at the end of regulation by making 2 FTs.

Us "old-schoolers" are allowed to say that without being told how stupid we are, right?

I agree.  And I understand the point that rate is much more important than make rate -- it's the old "make more free throws than the other team shoots" Buzzism.   But for end of game situations, it sure is nice having three guys making them at greater than 93%, and JJJ and HC ('cpet last night) have excellent averages as well.

[GGGG]

I will defer to you, JB and the rest of the analytics guys.

Yet even if I 100% agree that FT pct is a meaningless stat, I sure would have liked to have seen Haani ice the game at the end of regulation by making 2 FTs.

Us "old-schoolers" are allowed to say that without being told how stupid we are, right?

Here is how I usually put it.

It is always better to hit free throws than not hit free throws.

However over the course of a game, free throw percentage is NOT usually a reason why teams win or lose.  The end of the game stuff is highlighted due to recency bias, but there are much more important factors throughout a game that lead to teams winning or losing.

[Henry Sugar]

Here is how I usually put it.

It is always better to hit free throws than not hit free throws.

However over the course of a game, free throw percentage is NOT usually a reason why teams win or lose.  The end of the game stuff is highlighted due to recency bias, but there are much more important factors throughout a game that lead to teams winning or losing.

EDIT:

Mostly agree with your perspective. FTR is about 5% important. It matters in close games, like, say, a five-minute overtime period.

SHU shot 3-8 in OT from the charity stripe. Free throws were important last night in the OT win.

Also, the FTR stats for the OT period were MU at 200% and SHU at 133%. Sample size, but also more substantial when the OT rates are 4x a season average. Well, MU also shot 63% eFG% in OT and won the TO battle decisively.

[Nukem2]

Here is how I usually put it.

It is always better to hit free throws than not hit free throws.

However over the course of a game, free throw percentage is NOT usually a reason why teams win or lose.  The end of the game stuff is highlighted due to recency bias, but there are much more important factors throughout a game that lead to teams winning or losing.

WRecency bias?  When a guy misses 2 FTs with 16 seconds to go and the other team then score to tie the game and put it into OT.  I guess I would put that into a realm well beyond "recency bias".  Sure, yopu could say MU should have played better defense in those final 16 seconds, but.......

[brewcity77]

Us "old-schoolers" are allowed to say that without being told how stupid we are, right?

You'd always rather make them than miss them, and individual free throws can be incredibly important to the outcome of a game that is decided by one or two points. The reason the percentage is meaningless isn't because of individual outcomes, but rather because of statistical significance.

If FT percentage over the course of the game mattered, Marquette should have won handily with a 10% edge in free throws. Hell, if we played to form, we shoot 20% better on the year than SHU from the stripe, so it shouldn't be even close.

Where free throws matter is how frequently you get to the line. Whether you're a great free throw shooting team like we are or terrible like SHU, getting to the line is still offensively efficient. When MU gets two free throws in a trip, they average 1.618 ppp, which is great. When SHU gets two free throws, they average 1.222 ppp. Even though SHU is terrible at the line, if they were averaging 1.222 ppp this season, they would have a top-5 offense.

So free throw percentage, not so important. Getting to the line, however, is important. It's a big part of why they stayed with us last night, holding a 24-12 edge in free throw attempts until the final minute of regulation. Doesn't matter that we outshot them percentage wise at the line, their raw number of attempts overwhelmed us. In a similar fashion, their offensive rebounds gave them 8 more shot attempts than we had, so even though we killed them in eFG%, their sheer volume of attempts kept it close.

At the end of the game, when you're tied, or leading by 1-3 points at the line, can a single free throw swing the balance? Absolutely. However of far more importance is what happened to get to that point, and team FT% over the course of a season or game has virtually no impact on those snapshot moments (as evidenced by 82.7% FT shooter Haanif Cheatham going 3/6 at the stripe in the final minute).

[GGGG]

WRecency bias?  When a guy misses 2 FTs with 16 seconds to go and the other team then score to tie the game and put it into OT.  I guess I would put that into a realm well beyond "recency bias".  Sure, yopu could say MU should have played better defense in those final 16 seconds, but.......

Recency bias.  Plays made toward the end of the game are considered more crucial in people's minds even though in the grand scheme of things it made up only a small portion of the game played.

Haanif's missed free throws may have been the most *recent* reason the game went into overtime, but over the course of the game it was a pretty small reason.

[brewcity77]

Another indicator why free throw percentage doesn't matter, but free throw rate does. This season, Marquette has made 80.9% of their free throws, which is 3rd in the country, and scored 241 points in 16 games, an average of 15.06 ppg. Seton Hall has made 61.1% of their free throws, which is 340th in the country, and scored 239 points in 16 games, an average of 14.94 ppg. Despite being a MUCH better team at the line, we score virtually the same amount because what matters isn't the percentage, but how often you get there. 

[Lennys Tap]

Recency bias.  Plays made toward the end of the game are considered more crucial in people's minds even though in the grand scheme of things it made up only a small portion of the game played.

Haanif's missed free throws may have been the most *recent* reason the game went into overtime, but over the course of the game it was a pretty small reason.

It's not just recency bias - it's whether you believe in clutch/choke in key situations. I'm doubtful (but open) that some people actually get better (clutch) in key situations, but I'm convinced that many get worse (choke).

[Loose Cannon]

Another indicator why free throw percentage doesn't matter, but free throw rate does. This season, Marquette has made 80.9% of their free throws, which is 3rd in the country, and scored 241 points in 16 games, an average of 15.06 ppg. Seton Hall has made 61.1% of their free throws, which is 340th in the country, and scored 239 points in 16 games, an average of 14.94 ppg. Despite being a MUCH better team at the line, we score virtually the same amount because what matters isn't the percentage, but how often you get there.

Yeah, I heard coach K many time mention he wants his team to make more FT than the other team Attempts.

[brandx]

Here is how I usually put it.

It is always better to hit free throws than not hit free throws.

However over the course of a game, free throw percentage is NOT usually a reason why teams win or lose.  The end of the game stuff is highlighted due to recency bias, but there are much more important factors throughout a game that lead to teams winning or losing.

Once again, I agree with you - over the course of the game.

But, FT% factors in very highly in end of game situations - it is quite often why a team wins or loses a game. I'm sure if JB ran his same stats for only the last 3 minutes, those stats would show a different result.

We could say a turnover is a turnover - that a TO in the middle of the 1st half is just as important as a TO when your team is down by 1 point with 10 seconds remaining. Stat-wise, they are identical. We all know better.

[brewcity77]

Once again, I agree with you - over the course of the game.

But, FT% factors in very highly in end of game situations - it is quite often why a team wins or loses a game. I'm sure if JB ran his same stats for only the last 3 minutes, those stats would show a different result.

We could say a turnover is a turnover - that a TO in the middle of the 1st half is just as important as a TO when your team is down by 1 point with 10 seconds remaining. Stat-wise, they are identical. We all know better.

But it doesn't and last night proves it. Cheatham went to the line shooting 82.7% on the season coming into that final minute and went 3/6. How does free throw percentage matter there? If free throw percentage mattered, he'd have gone 5/6 and we walk out winners in regulation. Did that happen? No, we all know better.

And to the turnover point, so a turnover with 10 seconds remaining, trailing by 1, when the opponent doesn't score after is more important than the first half turnover that results in a made three at the other end? One cost you zero points, one cost you three. Tell me, which had more impact on the game?

[Vander Blue Man Group]

You interjected yourself into a conversation that you had nothing to do with to opine. FOH.

Yes, it sure must be stunning that someone would comment on a piece of a conversation on a public internet message board.  That never happens.   

[brandx]

Yes, it sure must be stunning that someone would comment on a piece of a conversation on a public internet message board.  That never happens.   

He's the old man in the neighborhood yelling to get off his lawn - conveniently forgetting that parks are made out of grass. For people to walk and play on.

Maybe he's got his precious stats laying all over the grass and doesn't want them stepped on.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Not Jay Bee, but what's impressed me isn't just the degree of improvement by Haanif (24.4% last year, 13.4% this year), but when he did it. Improving by 11% is massive, especially with no real change in usage. However most of the players I've looked back at don't see their improvements until their junior year.

The improvement is impressive.  I will point out however is that Haani changed positions from last year where he played PG in a major conference, a position he never played in his life. These others played the same position year to year.  While the usage % is comparable, the context isn't.