Poor shooting Huskies

[Zorro]

I just took a quick look at the season stats. The Huskies are shooting .533, .374 and .700 on overall, threes and freebies, respectively. SC is shooting .461, .352 and .653. Maybe some of the hand-wringing over our "poor shooting" is not entirely justified.

 

[da60]

I think that it is now the proper time to sit back, take many deep breaths, and enjoy this great matchup. Stats....Out the window! We have come a long way with some many unfortunate setbacks....so have other teams. If you feel a little queezy in the gut, then you are like most of us in the BY....husky fanatics. We have diced and sliced each kid loads of times....Won't we exhale better if we get off to a good start by seeing UConn's shots dropping? I am excited to watch tonight's game. To be honest, I am much more interested in tonight as opposed to last night's Super Bowl. Maybe it's aging. Go girls!

 

[Discograd]

Woff-season. This year the whole team needs to take appropriate time working with the coaches and 9n their own practicing free throws. This includes the offseason.

 

[fomalhaut]

I can't remember a Connecticut team that didn't seem to miss a lot of layups. A team leading Division I by 2-1/2 percent in field goal percentage, and their opponents by over 19%, probably shouldn't count shooting among their biggest concerns. Free-throw shooting isn't great, but not terrible either.

 

[Cuango]

Well, what happens if we take SC’s best shooter out of their stats? Probably the same, or close to it. The bottom line is that we are a better shooting team than SC. Does that mean much in one game? No. We just need to play well. If we do that, we should win.

 

[Jim]

The issue has been the free throw shooting against ranked teams has only been 36 for 66, or 54.5% (Dep. 9-18, Tenn. 10-21, Ark. 9-14, Dep. (2) 8-13). So the FT shooting in closer games (where it makes more of a difference) is cause for concern.

 

[eebmg]

The issue has been the free throw shooting against ranked teams has only been 36 for 66, or 54.5% (Dep. 9-18, Tenn. 10-21, Ark. 9-14, Dep. (2) 8-13). So the FT shooting in closer games (where it makes more of a difference) is cause for concern.

Weird after watching DePaul / Marquette make about 95 % of their FT's

 

[Bigboote]

Well, what happens if we take SC’s best shooter out of their stats? Probably the same, or close to it. The bottom line is that we are a better shooting team than SC. Does that mean much in one game? No. We just need to play well. If we do that, we should win.

Without Paige, UConn averages 1.35 (with her it's a little north of 1.37) points per field-goal attempt. With their best shooter (looks like Saxton), SC averages 1.22 points per shot. South Carolina takes a lot of low-percentage shots. They average about 7.5 assists a game fewer than UConn, which is largely responsible for that. I would think that Dawn Staley of all people would have a great-passing team. Kim Mulkey's (speaking of point guards) teams always seem to be at or near the top in assists.

 

[Zorro]

Well,if you take away Boston, SC is not so strong in the center!

 

[oldhusky]

Shooting percentages are a byproduct of how easy an attempt you get, and how well you shoot. Last year we had better shooters, but had by Uconn standards, just mediocre passing. In short we did pretty well making tough shots.

This year we added three point guards in Paige, Nika and Evina, the first two of which are exceptional passers. Now we get easy shots frequently but sometimes have trouble making them. The high two point percentage is because of the shots we are getting, far more than how we are shooting. On the one test of shooting that does not involve being set up in any way (free throws) we are terrible compared to most Uconn teams.

The good news is next year will be different, we will have passers and shooters.

 

[UcMiami]

Interesting to note that their current FG % would tie them for 3rd best team percentage with the 17/18 team. The best shooting team was 2014-15 at .540 and the second best was 1999-00 at .539.

The FT and 3Pt shooting are further down the list and the defensive FG% allowed (.341) is also a laggard.

Still those numbers are not too bad.

 

[Vowelguy]

Outside of Paige, the team shoots 30.5% from 3.
That's pretty bad.

 

[Dokey]

Outside of Paige, the team shoots 30.5% from 3.
That's pretty bad.

Any word on Anna? Is she out for the year? If AG and AE are on the floor at the same time our opponents can immediately ignore them when it comes to guarding jumpers. That puts extra defensive pressure on Paige. CW just seems to run hot and cold, partly because Paige now gets some of the shots that used to go to CW. Evina is contributing big time but less frequently in jumpers. Nika will just get better and better—I would like her to take at least six 3 tries a game.

This is the line-up that wins NC
PB
NM
EW backed up by AG and CW
AM if she’s available, I assume her slow start may be injury caused
ONO backed up by AE and AG

 

[my2cents]

Our total numbers show that we are very good offensive team , based on total points and shooting %.
However, in watching the games , who and where shots are taken, makes these games choppy looking.
ONO, who is pretty much left alone at the foul line to 3 pt line, is not a good outside shooter. However she does make some good passes and picks and rolls well. She is way more effective down low, with one caveat, she is good against smaller players. She does struggle down low against bigger players.
As for 3 pt shooting, we badly miss Anna...and Paige and Evina are right now are our reliable options. CW is down from mid 30's to 26% this year , a big drop off. Nika ( 33%) has not shown consistency yet, but is improving.
Foul shooting , the drop off is CW, from a 76% avg down to 60%...with critical misses, (thinking Ark). ONO can be ok to terrible.
Everyone else needs to make better decisions...thinking AG from 3's, Nika running at 100 mph into the lane, Mir throwing "Grenades" at the basket.
Geno has said repeatedly that this is not a normal year, and don't ask him what he thinks because he has no idea.
Pretty much every ranked team that I have watched has the same issues. However at the end of the day, we have Paige and they don't.

 

[HopJim]

Our shooting % should not be a surprise. When Nika and Aubrey are in together, typically with ONO, we have three average to poor outside offensive players, giving the defense the ability to focus on Paige and whoever else is in. Aubrey gets a lot of offensive rebounds but misses most of her outside shots and many layups. Nika makes some 3's and gets an occasional drive but is limited in her offensive creativity. Geno doing a great job of getting offense out of pick and rolls, back cuts, etc. Our secret weapon has been Edwards who overpowers most for layups. Imagine what our shooting % would be like without her high % shots.

 

[mattlow710]

Any word on Anna? Is she out for the year? If AG and AE are on the floor at the same time our opponents can immediately ignore them when it comes to guarding jumpers. That puts extra defensive pressure on Paige. CW just seems to run hot and cold, partly because Paige now gets some of the shots that used to go to CW. Evina is contributing big time but less frequently in jumpers. Nika will just get better and better—I would like her to take at least six 3 tries a game.

This is the line-up that wins NC
PB
NM
EW backed up by AG and CW
AM if she’s available, I assume her slow start may be injury caused
ONO backed up by AE and AG

My Bias for the team
PG Nika -- CW in then PB become PG
SG Paige
SF EW -- Anna if she is health
PF AE -- AG and Mir as a backed up for PF and C
C ONO

 

[Fairfield Fan]

The thing is that we're the "Paige Show". Best supporting actor/athlete nominations to go AE and Aubry Griffin. But after that, we're thin. Williams has been surprisingly up and down. Westbrook has had good moments, and games in which her poise has meant a great deal. But she has struggled to score during the season. And ONO, despite top-line numbers that look good, has frequently been a liability. Overwhelmingly, it is Paige who has been ONO's #1 asset. With the opposing players mobbing Paige when she moves toward the lane, ONO gets open when she rolls to the basket. Take out Paige's triple-teaming, and ONO is mired there, trying to figure out what to do with the ball. And it is Edwards who seems to open up possibilities for ONO as well. Edwards is the one who teams know is the serious down-low threat, so they collapse on her, leaving ONO open when the two are in the game. ONO is simply not a threat under the basket, and opposing teams know it.

Muhl is playing well, given her skills. But without Paige, this team would be struggling mightily, and would have likely lost a number of games this season.

Next year could be vastly different, with Paige's scoring totals going down sharply- which would be a good thing. If Fudd comes in and performs, and if DeBerry teams effectively underneath with Edwards, it will mean a lot more points being scored a lot sooner. And that will mean Paige gets to the bench to rest up for the next game much sooner. That's what happened with Maya. And that's all for the good.

 

[Waquoit]

This is a below par shooting team. The only way to shoot better is to practice shooting. Like I said, the best shooters ever like Larry Bird and Ray Allen shot 100's of shots a day their entire careers.

 

[Tonyc]

FWIW when we start hitting on all cylinders look out.

 

[jaundicedeye]

It it is maddening to see apparently easy shots around the rim not go in but I believe SC, with Ms. Boston, missed more lay-ups and put-backs than we did; especially at the end of the game. Phew!

 

[CocoHusky]

I just took a quick look at the season stats. The Huskies are shooting .533, .374 and .700 on overall, threes and freebies, respectively. SC is shooting .461, .352 and .653. Maybe some of the hand-wringing over our "poor shooting" is not entirely justified.

Well being like SC is not what UCONN should be aspiring to be with regards to shooting. If you exclude Paige's numbers I'm pretty sure that hand ring would quickly turn to just embarrassment.