Where did you see that and how In the world is that calculated? I don't buy that one bit, especially considering we took less threes than almost anyone in the BIG10.
Race is returning
- Thread starter Hoosierfan1901
- Start date
yes, that's what I mean........better than Race posting up all the time, especially with TJD in the game as well. Race rarely took that open 10-15 footer. Both those guys are good passers, but they didn't keep enough spacing much of the time.
That doesn't tell me anything other than some random Twitter account said IU did well at generating open threes.
If that actually was the case then we should shoot more of them. IU was 319th in the country in threes attempted and last in the conference.
Terrible take. Edey was a 4 out big. When Williams came in they went 5 out. Williams was a threat at 35% shooting from 3. Was he a volume shooter? No. The defender still had to come out on him. They didn’t play both because they had no back up at the 5. It’s a good problem to have.
LOL.
Don't agree with it so the stat must be wrong? You said it was tough for IU to get good looks for shooters because we played two bigs. There's a stat that directly corroborates your theory. Don't shoot the messenger.
Plus they had no backup at the 5. They also changed offense when Williams came in.
Kansas wasn’t a dynamic perimeter team either. 34-35% only averaged 7 made for the year. We missed to many easy open 10 feet in buckets. Took our efficiency away. We missed to many bunny’s .
It’s definitely our efficiency. Missed to many easy shots. Diving deeper tells me it wasn’t our 3 point shots at all. It was the easy buckets and turnovers.
You didn't show me any stats, just some Twitter account I've never heard of saying that IU was top 3 in generating open looks from three.
Which is obviously bs, if they were they wouldn't be ranked almost dead last in threes attempted. That's a stat, and it destroys any idea of IU being good at generating threes.
I just showed you a graphic where IU finished 3rd in the country in generating open looks from 3.
This on the back of you saying verbatim IU didn't generate open looks from 3 because IU played Race and Trayce together and it clogged the lane.
I don't really give a shit if you agree with it or not. I don't think that Twitter account made up a stat just to debunk an angry IU fan on a message board that clearly doesn't know what they're seeing.
Playing Trayce and Race together clogged the lane. Because of that we finished an abysmal 95th in offensive efficiency and almost dead last in the country in 3 pointers attempted.
I couldn't give two shits less about some random Twitter account claiming IU was great at generating 3s. Because outside of making Coach Geezer feel great about his shitty opinion on an IU message board it serves no purpose.
LOL.
You literally said IU didn't get good looks from the perimeter BECAUSE Trayce and Race clogged the lane. That metric directly contradicts your statement as IU finished top 3 nationally in uncontested 3 point shots. Not disagreeing for one second that IU was a poor shooting team or the offense was inefficient, but it sure as hell wasn't because Race and Trayce played together.
I don’t understand how you can be a coach his son and a gym rat and not be able to shoot. It boggles my mind
There is no metric that proves anything, you showed me a tweet that has IU ranked 3rd in something with zero proof to back it up.
I've cited multiple stats that help prove my point, you've ignored them and shown no stats at all other than some random dude's opinion. Again, IU RANKED 319TH IN THREES ATTEMPTED.
That instantly puts to bed any notion that IU was great at producing open threes. To claim otherwise is ignorant and quite frankly makes zero sense.
It doesn't at all actually.
All that metric shows is that IU generated (what the author construes) open looks from 3 more than all but two teams in the country. It has zero bearing on the raw number of attempts or made shots.
Frankly, IU didn't attempt a lot of 3's because they didn't make a lot of them, because their highest volume 3 point shooters weren't capable of creating their own shot. That doesn't mean the ones they took weren't uncontested though, which is literally all that graphic states.
You made the ridiculous statement, not me.
You don't think IU barely taking any threes at all benefits them on a list of teams that don't take many contested threes? Really?
Your whole point of view here is ridiculous.
So if we get more athletic wings that can drive we don’t want both guys playing and clogging the lane
Edey and Williams…both post players. Race and Trayce both post okayers. Painter didn’t play together because they didn’t want the lane clogged for Edey.
What are you talking about?
IU didn't take a lot of 3's because they didn't make many of them. It's as simple as that. That doesn't mean the the 3's they did take were contested though. Again, you made the ridiculous claim that IU didn't generate enough looks from the perimeter with the way Trayce and Race were positioned in the offense. I offered a graphic that directly refutes your observation. You've provided nothing except for shouting that IU was last in the B10 in # of 3 point attempts which is completely irrelevant to the claim you made. No one has argued that IU didn't take a lot of 3's.
Who said they would be clogging the lane? I want athletic wings who can beat their man off the dribble and pull up and/or go all the way to the rim.
You can play Race backside on the baseline or high low with Trayce and not clog the lane. That's for Woody to figure out. But you can absolutely play Race and Trayce together. Offense is always going to stall when you have flat-footed guards who can't create their own shot. That was IU's biggest problem offensively last year by far.
You're not understanding the metric and your arguments against it are because you don't want to. Just because it doesn't fit your narrative doesn't mean it's wrong.
It's not gauging percentage so percentage doesn't matter. It's not gauging makes per game so that doesn't matter. What it is measuring is open perimeter looks. That's how stats work. they only measure what they were intended to measure.
What's not being mentioned is why we had so many. It's not just a byproduct of the offense in this case, it's most likely a byproduct of defense allowing them open looks by packing the lane.
Many in the business have access to Synergy which is a analytical site that tracks all this stuff. If you want a one year membership to the site, it only costs $8500 per year.
Last edited:
So It's not gauging percentage yet IU is still ranked top 3 in the country in open three pointers taken even though they barely took any this year?
That's incredible, I mean I don't buy it but it's still incredible.
Do we know what is being measured and if so…..
Is it measuring percentage of three point shots attempted that are “open”? Or is it measuring number (quantity) of open threes? I assume either way it is only considering attempted shots (open threes that are passed up are excluded)?
Is it measuring percentage of three point shots attempted that are “open”? Or is it measuring number (quantity) of open threes? I assume either way it is only considering attempted shots (open threes that are passed up are excluded)?
3's taken without a hand in face is the general manner it's represented. It would be slightly subjective to whoever is tracking the stat though. Assume there's parameters, but when in grey area .. it's the stat keepers choice.
The only place to get these splits in detail is either synergy or another pay out your ass professional analytical site.
Idk, you are seeing this in the NBA as wel. They want the 4 out of the paint to spread the court.
Lol. Poopoo this stat but keep hanging you hat on a volume stat that doesn’t provide context. We were 197 in 3pt%. Not good. But 74 overall in FG%. We did OK shooting overall and improved. We need to take another step forward and we will be good. Nobody here knows what that will look like.
Just finishing would get us in the top half. God how many east buckets did that team miss.
No kidding. I would love to see a stat on how many bunnies we missed. Some uncontested. And FT. We did decent getting to the line. We missed so many additional attempts missing the front end and didn’t do well cashing in on two shot fouls. Left a lot of points on the floor right there.
So plenty of opportunities to earn more points, inside and outside.
That is the downside, Race is not getting better and will take minutes from JG. By the same token if JG doesn't care enough about his game to realize he's a 2 and not a 4 and work towards that then maybe he's a project we don't need. At least RT is right for his position in college
JG is not close to a 2. He can barely play the 3. JG ceiling is high but he’s going to have to work at it.
It’s strange to me too. Although I’m guessing Trey has always been bigger, faster, and stronger than his peers, up until college obviously. So he was probably always asked to make plays going to the basket.
He’s a more capable shooter than what he’s shown at IU thus far. But yeah, you would have thought that part of his countless hours in the gym with his dads teams would have led to a better shot.
The other extreme are the gym rats that can’t do anything but shoot, and those guys are everywhere.
JG is not remotely close to a 2. What planet did you get that from?
