3 point shooting since Polley went down | The Boneyard

3 point shooting since Polley went down

HooperScooper

HooperScooper

Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
20,460
Reaction Score
117,728
Polley hasn't played in the last 3 games. Before he went down the team was 107-313 from three for 34%. Polley himself was 30-74 for 40.5%.

In the last 3 games the Huskies are 12-50 for 24%. 6-19 against WSU, 2-15 against Villanova, and 4-16 at Houston. That is truly horrid. I know 3 games is a relatively small sample size. And the last 3 games have been against ranked teams, although someone on here, and Ken Pomeroy, said 3 point shooting is completely random so we'll discount the fact that these games were against better teams. Their defense supposedly had nothing to do with UConn's poor shooting.

If they shot at least 34% from three in each of those 3 games they probably win all of them. Yeah, I know, you could point to a million different things they could have done better and they would have won all three!

They just have to shoot better from three. And they will. No way 24% can continue.
 
Polley was our best 3 point shooter, but he also showed what he was capable of in the Tulane game when he had 19 points and 11 rebounds which was his best game as a Husky. Maybe he figured it out that game, then I think we really miss the player he was becoming. It looked like he realized that he is 6'9" and taller than almost everyone on the court and he could contribute more than he had previously.
 
.-.
Without shooting, we need to be in the 20's in fast break points and give ourselves some easy baskets.

We aren't going to win going into a half court battle with most of these teams.
 
.-.
HooperScooper said:
Polley hasn't played in the last 3 games. Before he went down the team was 107-313 from three for 34%. Polley himself was 30-74 for 40.5%.

In the last 3 games the Huskies are 12-50 for 24%. 6-19 against WSU, 2-15 against Villanova, and 4-16 at Houston. That is truly horrid. I know 3 games is a relatively small sample size. And the last 3 games have been against ranked teams, although someone on here, and Ken Pomeroy, said 3 point shooting is completely random so we'll discount the fact that these games were against better teams. Their defense supposedly had nothing to do with UConn's poor shooting.

If they shot at least 34% from three in each of those 3 games they probably win all of them. Yeah, I know, you could point to a million different things they could have done better and they would have won all three!

They just have to shoot better from three. And they will. No way 24% can continue.
Expand ...
3pt shooting
Your preaching to the choir
This is a problem Bouknight needs to be in the 35-40% and Akok 30-35% range and this team takes off.
 
HooperScooper said:
Polley hasn't played in the last 3 games. Before he went down the team was 107-313 from three for 34%. Polley himself was 30-74 for 40.5%.

In the last 3 games the Huskies are 12-50 for 24%. 6-19 against WSU, 2-15 against Villanova, and 4-16 at Houston. That is truly horrid. I know 3 games is a relatively small sample size. And the last 3 games have been against ranked teams, although someone on here, and Ken Pomeroy, said 3 point shooting is completely random so we'll discount the fact that these games were against better teams. Their defense supposedly had nothing to do with UConn's poor shooting.

If they shot at least 34% from three in each of those 3 games they probably win all of them. Yeah, I know, you could point to a million different things they could have done better and they would have won all three!

They just have to shoot better from three. And they will. No way 24% can continue.
Expand ...


Just make free throws
 
HooperScooper said:
Polley hasn't played in the last 3 games. Before he went down the team was 107-313 from three for 34%. Polley himself was 30-74 for 40.5%.

In the last 3 games the Huskies are 12-50 for 24%. 6-19 against WSU, 2-15 against Villanova, and 4-16 at Houston. That is truly horrid. I know 3 games is a relatively small sample size. And the last 3 games have been against ranked teams, although someone on here, and Ken Pomeroy, said 3 point shooting is completely random so we'll discount the fact that these games were against better teams. Their defense supposedly had nothing to do with UConn's poor shooting.

If they shot at least 34% from three in each of those 3 games they probably win all of them. Yeah, I know, you could point to a million different things they could have done better and they would have won all three!

They just have to shoot better from three. And they will. No way 24% can continue.
Expand ...
Hate to be the bearer of bad tidings but yes it can continue but maybe at 30%. That alone would not sink the team but then there are bonehead plays and turnovers.....foul shooting.....
 
The double dagger is ho hum 3 pt shooting and bad ft shooting. It's tough to win consistently with these two strikes.
 
.-.
don356 said:
The double dagger is ho hum 3 pt shooting and bad ft shooting. It's tough to win consistently with these two strikes.
Expand ...
When you dig deep into the box scores, that pretty says it all. Just look at the Wichita St game, we missed 13 free throws in a three point loss. The other night at Houston, we missed 8 free throws in a four point loss. Even the Indiana game still bothers me because we lost by 3, but we missed four free throws. That was the difference in the game.
 
jibsey said:
Hate to be the bearer of bad tidings but yes it can continue but maybe at 30%. That alone would not sink the team but then there are bonehead plays and turnovers.....foul shooting.....
Expand ...
30% > 24% = Better but < Good
 
Ts5034 said:
When you dig deep into the box scores, that pretty says it all. Just look at the Wichita St game, we missed 13 free throws in a three point loss. The other night at Houston, we missed 8 free throws in a four point loss. Even the Indiana game still bothers me because we lost by 3, but we missed four free throws. That was the difference in the game.
Expand ...
 
I'll update this after every game to see if they improve. Yesterday's 9-33 did not help much (sad to think that their percentage actually went up a little after 9-33!).

Before Polley went down: 107-313 from three for 34%
4 games since: 20-83 from three for 24% *

* I posted up above that in the Wichita State game they were 6-19 but they were actually 5-19. So it was 22% (11-50) in the first 3 games after Polley got injured.

24% for the season would put them dead last in D1 three point shooting percentage. Like 350 out of 350 teams! Which is why I don't think it will stay this bad for much longer. They're not this bad.

Just for comparison purposes, the 34% before Polley went out would put them at 136 today. So not great, but not terrible either.
 
.-.
I said in another thread that we will never know how these games would’ve played out with Polley. It probably wouldn’t have hurt to have our most reliable shooter available. Whether or not the other parts of his game suddenly had fallen into place in his last game we also don’t know. But the team is what it is and because 3 point shooting is random, CV, who can be relied on for a few made threes, did nothing. I went to a Celtic game years ago where one of their best gunners. Tom Heinson, was something like 0-15, maybe his worst pro shooting night.

Our team is obviously flaws and different issues have resulted in losses. Polley is one of them.
 
HooperScooper said:
I'll update this after every game to see if they improve. Yesterday's 9-33 did not help much (sad to think that their percentage actually went up a little after 9-33!).

Before Polley went down: 107-313 from three for 34%
4 games since: 20-83 from three for 24% *

* I posted up above that in the Wichita State game they were 6-19 but they were actually 5-19. So it was 22% (11-50) in the first 3 games after Polley got injured.

24% for the season would put them dead last in D1 three point shooting percentage. Like 350 out of 350 teams! Which is why I don't think it will stay this bad for much longer. They're not this bad.

Just for comparison purposes, the 34% before Polley went out would put them at 136 today. So not great, but not terrible either.
Expand ...
Yeah, I thought like you they're not that bad, but guess what? They are. I thought a while back that Gilbert would come back to his average but he has not. Vital has streaks where he goes off but not lately. Question, do we have a shooting coach? If not we need one.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,555
Messages
4,582,645
Members
10,492
Latest member
7774Forever


Top Bottom