Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="hoophuskee, post: 3995010, member: 3535"] No argument from me about 2pt%. I was just replying to 3pt shooting and using a caveat in a similar manner that there was one used by "excluding Paige." If we can make a point to exclude team data by taking away a player from the data like what was done with Paige then we can exclude certain data for a freshman (Nika) before the freshman got fully acclimated (and healthy) to college hoop/ at UCONN. Nearly all freshmen have a learning curve (and injuries can affect anyone.) . But as for last year Nika did what very good freshmen do- she got better (and healthier). One aspect was in her 3pt shooting. So why should we disregard the point in which Geno started becoming more confident in her- the GTOWN game? And at that starting point then going forward- she was 37.7% from 3. And whether we cite the 3-8 as you mentioned or the 37.7% that I've indicated; that is an Effective Field Goal % of 56.25%- 56.55%. As a result of this data, this isn't an "abysmal 3pt shooter," nor is it "a not very good 3pt shooter," nor is it "a mediocre 3pt shooter." When you have an Effective Field Goal % between 56.25%- 56.55%- you are a good 3pt shooter. I do have caution though for this year due to the move out of the 3pt line. I have no idea if that will affect her or others. I expect it won't affect Paige or Azzi much if at all- but all the others - I don't know. But as for last year- one can't use one caveat then disregard another. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,459

Messages: 4,396,988

Members: 10,209

Latest member: noelle