Other Team Mid-Range and Crazy Shots | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Other Team Mid-Range and Crazy Shots

Last night felt like a little bit of luck and a little bit of just a good scout by Shaka. That’s the thing we’ve seen over and over since BE play started - these are some very good, smart coaches that will work really hard to find what works against UConn and try to exploit it.

Which makes it even more surprising that McDermott decided to not double Sanogo all game.
That’s kind of the concerning thing right now. Since teams have found what works, we haven’t adjusted to be able to win one game when a team uses that gameplan.

Creighton was a mix of them shooting terribly and McDermott either being arrogant or stupid to not follow what’s been working.

We have to find a counter for what these teams are doing.
 
I imagine that I am not the only one who believes that our losses to date this season haven't been purely due to luck.

There are things that the advanced metrics that so many are falling in love with these days happen to miss, starting with the reality that we lost last night due to play on both ends in the part of the court (mid-range two point shots) that allegedly is the worst place to pay attention to if you want to win.

One major point on the missed open three point shots that we've missed at a far higher rate in our losses than the statistics would expect: if a player has been harrassed by the defense consistently, if he has had far fewer shot attempts than normal, if he has been taking shots at a more stressful situation than he had when his percentages were more to the "norm", there is a strong likelyhood that even if he is open for the stray attempt, he may rush the shot, he may be off on his mechanics, his rhythm or even his confidence. The defense that we faced in our losses (also in some brief stretches in a couple of wins) have made it more difficult for us to score than what we saw when we were steamrolling pretty solid teams earlier in the season.

I see the biggest concern being our guards don't respond well to being pressured early in the possession.
Luck? Offense certainly could be better, but defense needs improvement too- and luck doesn't play much of a role in defense.
 
Oh, so just take more wide open 3's? Why didn't I think of that? How about uncontested layups and dunks? Since we are talking about magical thinking, why not just play with 10 people on our side and 1 player on theirs?

By this logic, what is the point of playing defense? All the matters is where the shot is taken from, right? You trying to shoot a 3 over Clingan is a higher percentage shot than Steph Curry wide open from 15 feet? Got it.

One of the Top 5 things I love about the Boneyard is when Nelson replies to a post with a hilarious strawman argument.

You have the total package...can go from well-thought-out analytical posts to ridiculous strawmans. Appreciate it. I truly do. (not throwing shade)

 
Am I the only one who feels like teams hit shots they never hit when they play us? Found this tweet really interesting. Marquette hit more mid-range shots last night than they had hit in the last 12 games COMBINED! Even when we win feel like teams hit crazy shots (Georgetown game especially). First couple games teams hit crazy shots against us, it's bad luck - but now, I'm not sure how to explain for it.


When something happens over and over again it's not luck/bad luck.
 
I imagine that I am not the only one who believes that our losses to date this season haven't been purely due to luck.

There are things that the advanced metrics that so many are falling in love with these days happen to miss, starting with the reality that we lost last night due to play on both ends in the part of the court (mid-range two point shots) that allegedly is the worst place to pay attention to if you want to win.

One major point on the missed open three point shots that we've missed at a far higher rate in our losses than the statistics would expect: if a player has been harrassed by the defense consistently, if he has had far fewer shot attempts than normal, if he has been taking shots at a more stressful situation than he had when his percentages were more to the "norm", there is a strong likelyhood that even if he is open for the stray attempt, he may rush the shot, he may be off on his mechanics, his rhythm or even his confidence. The defense that we faced in our losses (also in some brief stretches in a couple of wins) have made it more difficult for us to score than what we saw when we were steamrolling pretty solid teams earlier in the season.

I see the biggest concern being our guards don't respond well to being pressured early in the possession.

Yep, the intangible human factor. "Toughness", "ice in the veins", whatever phrase you want to call it.

Our players (guards mostly) have just not played well at all in a hostile away Big East environment against a quality opponent.
 
But they’re making them “at such a high rate” only if you ignore the blocks. Our guys had 11 blocks last night. That’s a lot of blocks. Really a lot. We have been stopping .

Sorry for the typo. The last word should be “shores”.
 
.-.
Look at the 2nd tweet in the series.


Yes, they made more shots than expected considering the defense and location and player averages. We played the best defense against them of anyone all season.

Same thing against NMSU last year. It happens, though seemingly more to us than others. Maybe we just remember the bad luck more.

On the other side, I suspect Creighton was well below their expected shot value against us on Saturday.
 
this makes me miss RIP more and more. I wish some one on this team such as Hawk or Ajax develop some killer mid range shots. So far we ride or die on 3 or paint.
 
Am I the only one who feels like teams hit shots they never hit when they play us? Found this tweet really interesting. Marquette hit more mid-range shots last night than they had hit in the last 12 games COMBINED! Even when we win feel like teams hit crazy shots (Georgetown game especially). First couple games teams hit crazy shots against us, it's bad luck - but now, I'm not sure how to explain for it.


There is no such thing as coincidence. This, as the other poster alluded, has to do with our defense scheme that get exposed against our league teams once the non conf play period is over. Our man to man is too rigid and our guards always chase the player under screen or around screen, and our defense against P&R also sucks, and this attributes to the high percentage shots for opposing team over and over again. We don’t we just switch?
 
I find these "contested shot" analyses always seem to find every 2 pointer contested but a strikingly large percentage of 3 pointers to be open, even though most defenses do not defend the mid-range at all anymore. Hmmm. But you are right, they don't have an agenda.
Yeah, they do have an agenda - to get paid. And they get paid because the analysis they provide is accurate. If not, they wouldn't get paid, would they ?
 
Yeah, they do have an agenda - to get paid. And they get paid because the analysis they provide is accurate. If not, they wouldn't get paid, would they ?

You guys ever been in a meeting with one of the market research firms? They are masters of telling you exactly what you want to hear. THAT is how they get paid.
 
.-.
One of the Top 5 things I love about the Boneyard is when Nelson replies to a post with a hilarious strawman argument.

You have the total package...can go from well-thought-out analytical posts to ridiculous strawmans. Appreciate it. I truly do. (not throwing shade)


It is not meant to be a strawman. This board engages in magical thinking all of the time. "Take more 3's" or "attack the rim more" is idiotic. Does everyone realize that basketball occurs with TWO teams on the court, reacting to each other in real-time? If your opponent knows you are only going to take 3's or attack the basket, what are they going to do? Not a rhetorical question, what do people think the defense will do if we only take two kinds of shots?
 
this makes me miss RIP more and more. I wish some one on this team such as Hawk or Ajax develop some killer mid range shots. So far we ride or die on 3 or paint.
To you, but unfortunately not only you: Richard Hamilton's nickname was Rip, not RIP. The only thing RIP had to do with Hamilton is that it's what you would wish to any opponent who had to defend him.
 
They said in pregame that Shaka has guys working on shooting off the glass in practice. They then proceeded to eat us up with effortless “difficult” shots off the glass.
 
.-.
Sure. And these guys are professionals used by all 30 NBA teams in business for almost 30 years. I trust their opinion.

So by this logic, despite the fact that every defense is designed to stop 3's and protect the rim, once the games starts, the players are defending mid-range shots instead. Just want to make sure I understand what you and they are saying.
 
Same thing against NMSU last year. It happens, though seemingly more to us than others. Maybe we just remember the bad luck more.

On the other side, I suspect Creighton was well below their expected shot value against us on Saturday.
You'd be correct, didn't see the actual numbers but they did tweet this

 
That’s kind of the concerning thing right now. Since teams have found what works, we haven’t adjusted to be able to win one game when a team uses that gameplan.

Creighton was a mix of them shooting terribly and McDermott either being arrogant or stupid to not follow what’s been working.

We have to find a counter for what these teams are doing.
Call me crazy but last night didn't really feel anything like the losses to Xavier or PC, and I'm hopeful that might be a good thing. Xavier and PC both consistently went at Karaban, and he was one of our better defenders last night. Xavier and PC, we shot abysmally from the free throw line and that wasn't the case last night.

The biggest common denominators I saw is that all 3 teams shot over 80% from the FT line (over 10% above their respective averages) and got there consistently. And also that we weren't making our 3's down the stretch
 
You guys ever been in a meeting with one of the market research firms? They are masters of telling you exactly what you want to hear. THAT is how they get paid.
The above is sadly true. But as for analytics i have found them to be helpful in framing uconn games after the fact. I’m guilty of mentally praising one big play from a player or mentally disowning a player for a bad play that I lose sight of anything else they do without it being colored by that one thing. Last night I thought newton and Hawkins were playing well until I saw some metrics. We are emotional fans and sometimes that ain’t good
 
.-.
So by this logic, despite the fact that every defense is designed to stop 3's and protect the rim, once the games starts, the players are defending mid-range shots instead. Just want to make sure I understand what you and they are saying.
I don't think I said anything exactly like that in this thread, but this is what I'll say. We have a bunch of PnR coverages and defensive schemes, but the overarching philosophy and uniting thread is to prevent open 3's. So we will often overplay the 3-point line, close out hard, go over screens, etc. Offenses will take what seems available, which is often a contested midrange jumper or floater. Which is better than "we're literally standing on top of you to block your 3 point attempt" or "let's try a layup from our 6'2" point guard against a 7'2" with a 7'5" wingspan guy with a 16% block rate".

In general, offenses are drilled pretty strongly not to shoot a 3 with a guy draped all over them, especially early in the shot clock. So offenses will run their actions to attempt to gain an advantage heading towards the rim (most often through PnR). Their 2 best options are get to the rim with penetration or pass or kick out to open 3 once defense collapses to help. But we don't really collapse (although we do shade a bit towards the roll-man). And then they get to the rim and realize Clingan (or Sanogo) is there and our PnR defense has slowed the attack enough (through hedge or drop contain) so that our on ball defender has made up the ground and erased the advantage. So now we've checkmated the offense into taking the shots we want, which is contested midrange jumpers/floaters or heavily contested shots at the rim. So as you say, we end up defending a lot of mid-range shots. In fact I have the numbers, we force the 17th most 2-point jumpers of any team in the country, roughly 1/3 of shots. The best shooters in the entire world (talking Kevin Durant, Chris Paul) make 45-52% of contested 2s. Our opponents overall are shooting 36% on those midrange 2s. I haven't charted what Xavier did on actual contested vs. uncontested shots, but they shot 75% on non-blocked 2s yesterday.

Of course, offenses are always trying to break that checkmate and get high quality shots like dunks and layups if available. Marquette did that too often in the 2nd half to go along with shooting well on their contested midrange 2s when they couldn't. They're a top 5 offense in the country for a reason.

The other option for offenses against us is just go straight 1v1 ISO, without playing the "try to gain an advantage" cat and mouse game. Which at the college level usually isn't a great option, because you're not really going 1v1 usually. Smaller arc compared to NBA and no defensive 3 seconds means help is closer. However, Providence and Xavier were able to win 1v1s enough (often by drawing fouls thanks to our over-aggressiveness and Karaban not quite being stout enough as a freshman), that it worked out.

We ourselves take hardly any midrange jumpers on offense, because Sanogo is our guy to take advantage of 1v1s and he's extremely effective at it. We do our best to spread the court so that teams can't help on him. Thus the 4-out and Karaban's importance. We also have Hawkins off screens for quick release 3s. And Clingan on the roll also... He generates an advantage just by his size, mobility, and hands. These 3 are why we can have an elite offense without an elite on ball PG generating advantages. That and we're lethal in transition with our shooters flaring out to the wings. Defenses don't have a lot of good options for defending us, so they've resorted to allowing high value shots (wide open 3s) to our worst shooters and hoping the variance swings their way. A few teams with the requisite personnel (OMax Prosper for Marquette, Devin Carter of Providence, Colby Jones of Xavier) have been able to take away Hawkins, which reduces our options by 1, and allows them to focus more on clogging the paint with everyone else.

Other teams scheme defense differently. No middle and pack line Ds try to take away the paint and rim totally and are content to offer contested and somewhat open 3s instead. So our tradeoff is allowing a few more contested shots at the rim, but less open 3s. A few years ago, using mostly the same scheme, our defense was a lot worse, because we allowed too many attempts at the rim vs. midrange and didn't contest them well enough.
 
Last edited:
I lot of those drives and spin moves leading to banks off the glass by Prosper and one other guy (don't remember his name) were very difficult for our guys to defend because... well, how can I put this?... there was some fancy footwork going on.
 
I don't think I said anything exactly like that in this thread, but this is what I'll say. We have a bunch of PnR coverages and defensive schemes, but the overarching philosophy and uniting thread is to prevent open 3's. So we will often overplay the 3-point line, close out hard, go over screens, etc. Offenses will take what seems available, which is often a contested midrange jumper or floater. Which is better than "we're literally standing on top of you to block your 3 point attempt" or "let's try a layup from our 6'2" point guard against a 7'2" with a 7'5" wingspan guy with a 16% block rate".

In general, offenses are drilled pretty strongly not to shoot a 3 with a guy draped all over them, especially early in the shot clock. So offenses will run their actions to attempt to gain an advantage heading towards the rim (most often through PnR). Their 2 best options are get to the rim with penetration or pass or kick out to open 3 once defense collapses to help. But we don't really collapse (although we do shade a bit towards the roll-man). And then they get to the rim and realize Clingan (or Sanogo) is there and our PnR defense has slowed the attack enough (through hedge or drop contain) so that our on ball defender has made up the ground and erased the advantage. So now we've checkmated the offense into taking the shots we want, which is contested midrange jumpers/floaters or heavily contested shots at the rim. So as you say, we end up defending a lot of mid-range shots. In fact I have the numbers, we force the 17th most 2-point jumpers of any team in the country, roughly 1/3 of shots. The best shooters in the entire world (talking Kevin Durant, Chris Paul) make 45-52% of contested 2s. Our opponents overall are shooting 36% on those midrange 2s. I haven't charted what Xavier did on actual contested vs. uncontested shots, but they shot 75% on non-blocked 2s yesterday.

Of course, offenses are always trying to break that checkmate and get high quality shots like dunks and layups if available. Marquette did that too often in the 2nd half to go along with shooting well on their contested midrange 2s when they couldn't. They're a top 5 offense in the country for a reason.

The other option for offenses against us is just go straight 1v1 ISO, without playing the "try to gain an advantage" cat and mouse game. Which at the college level usually isn't a great option, because you're not really going 1v1 usually. Smaller arc compared to NBA and no defensive 3 seconds means help is closer. However, Providence and Xavier were able to win 1v1s enough (often by drawing fouls thanks to our over-aggressiveness and Karaban not quite being stout enough as a freshman), that it worked out.

We ourselves take hardly any midrange jumpers on offense, because Sanogo is our guy to take advantage of 1v1s and he's extremely effective at it. We do our best to spread the court so that teams can't help on him. Thus the 4-out and Karaban's importance. We also have Hawkins off screens for quick release 3s. And Clingan on the roll also... He generates an advantage just by his size, mobility, and hands. These 3 are why we can have an elite offense without an elite on ball PG generating advantages. That and we're lethal in transition with our shooters flaring out to the wings. Defenses don't have a lot of good options for defending us, so they've resorted to allowing high value shots (wide open 3s) to our worst shooters and hoping the variance swings their way. A few teams with the requisite personnel (OMax Prosper for Marquette, Devin Carter of Providence, Colby Jones of Xavier) have been able to take away Hawkins, which reduces our options by 1, and allows them to focus more on clogging the paint with everyone else.

Other teams scheme defense differently. No middle and pack line Ds try to take away the paint and rim totally and are content to offer contested and somewhat open 3s instead. So our tradeoff is allowing a few more contested shots at the rim, but less open 3s. A few years ago, using mostly the same scheme, our defense was a lot worse, because we allowed too many attempts at the rim vs. midrange and didn't contest them well enough.
The Big Lebowski Dude GIF
 
I watched the post game and one thing Dan Hurley said was that they are over reliant on set plays - not enough on court creativity. This is why we get scouted so hard, or at least one major factor.
 
and now a word on big data.
recently, someone here posted sweet charts on shooting stuff.
great stuff, legit, and to even the casual observer, completely intrinsically known. ya see, the majority of folks are right handed, and those charts show that the majority of field shots made, 3's or 2's, are, ummm, from the right side! imagine that. ergo, res ipsa loquitor, pay extra attention to righties shooting from the right. indisputable.
they also demonstrate that the shot which separates real shooters from posers, is the baseline j. any baller knows this. the charts show that, obviously, us and many others don't take that shot much anymore, cuz we/they can't make them.
big data.
period.
i don't know the data, but im fairly confident that the next left baseline j made by ajax will prolly be his first. this baseline j stuff gives me pause on hawk, tho i'll cut him slack cuz he looks like he should be both jacking, and making them. wait till donno gets the freedom to take those from a short distance. he'll make them at a statistically noticeable rate, leading to pumpfake dunks when d's then guard against them.
garantee.
 
.-.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,214
Messages
4,557,496
Members
10,442
Latest member
StatsMan


Top Bottom