The small sample size is indicative of Nika style of play. She does not attack the basket enough to draw contact and get to the foul line nor is she enough of a threat offensively inside the arc to prevent other teams from sagging off to help on other UCONN player.
You said:
Nika had the second lowest FG percentage on the team last year and this year she has the lowest FG percentage of all 9 players in the regular rotation. BTW there is another reason Nika cannot be on the floor at the end of close games. She is shooting 33% from foul line.
So I assumed you were talking about NM being untrustworthy at the FT line at the end of close games since based on her 6 FTs, you think she will continue to shoot at 33%. Of course, using such a small sample size is very misleading and just plain stupid, not to mention insulting to the entire BY here. Why are you trying to mislead the BY on this Coocoo?
You could have used last year’s FT% of 73%, but of course that would not have fit so nicely into your bogus negative narrative since NM shot a very respectable % at the line on 11 shots. A reasonably competent person would know that 73%, based on almost twice the FTs, would be a better indication of what NM shoots at the line – or at least average the two years. I guess since Mir was 0 -2 on FTs and 0-1 on FG attempts, we can expect her to never see the ball go through the net when it leaves her hands. Too bad you didn’t notify Virginia of this astute analysis of yours before Mir’s transfer!
Then when you are challenged with this astute analysis of yours, you come back with
: The small sample size is indicative of Nika style of play. She does not attack the basket enough to draw contact and get to the foul line nor is she enough of a threat offensively inside the arc (By the way she is shooting better inside that arc than any other guard not named PB and .4% behind EW!)
to prevent other teams from sagging off to help on other UCONN player. But yet the context of your original statement was very clear when you said
: BTW there is another reason Nika cannot be on the floor at the end of close games. She is shooting 33% from foul line. Now maybe you don't understand that to preserve a lead at the end of the game, teams normally play a game to keep the ball away from the defense as long as possible, trying to
AVOID being fouled until the end of the shot clock when they will attempt a reasonable shot. They are not trying to attack the basket and that was the context of your original reply.
You did the same with this gem:
Nika had the second lowest FG percentage on the team last year and this year she has the lowest FG percentage of all 9 players in the regular rotation. Well, maybe last year had something to do with the multitude of layups she missed in the
early part of the season when she was both playing hurt and probably a bit too geeked up to play evenly. But no, you will not mention that either since it does not fit your negative narrative.
You also conveniently left out that after PB, she
LED the team in three-point percentage last year…. Now why did you leave that little nugget out Coocoo? Let me guess, it didn’t fit your negative narrative again.
In total FG% this year, she is only a few makes away from EW and is shooting better than EW from 3 pt and only a few makes away from reaching PB and CW in 3 pt. But here is the real nugget you conveniently left out,
SHE IS SHOOTING BETTER FROM 2 PT THAN ANY GUARD ON THE TEAM NOT NAMED PB and .4% behind EW(that means out of every 250 shots, she is one behind EW). Why did you leave that out Coocoo? Why are you trying to mislead the boneyard by cherry picking your information?
Also, her stats in Reb, steals, assists, TO rate (and she has the ball in her hands more than most) are all very respectable, but of course you will not mention that either.
Finally, she commits exactly 1 foul more than CW per 40 minutes whilst playing defense for the entire 94 feet, unlike CW.
So there you go again doing what you always do: cherry picking the facts to fit your negative spin and then changing the context to also fit your negative spin. This is called verbal diarrhoea!
I would think that the rest of the BY is wise enough to pick up on this BS.
