Pros, Cons, Conclusions vs. Oklahoma State

[pj]

And UConn is better than 81st in 12 of the 20, yet you continue to spin some weird narrative about their FT shooting

What narrative? All I've said is that 78% FT shooting helps a team more than 73.6% FT shooting, and I've estimated how much it helps -- in victory margin, 1 point per game; in chance of winning the NCAA championship for UConn this year, an extra 3% chance. How is that weird?

 

[navery12]

What narrative? All I've said is that 78% FT shooting helps a team more than 73.6% FT shooting, and I've estimated how much it helps -- in victory margin, 1 point per game; in chance of winning the NCAA championship for UConn this year, an extra 3% chance. How is that weird?

Because to put it kindly, that math to get a 3% extra chance of winning a championship with better FT shooting is a bunch of nonsense

 

[HooperScooper]

What narrative? All I've said is that 78% FT shooting helps a team more than 73.6% FT shooting, and I've estimated how much it helps -- in victory margin, 1 point per game; in chance of winning the NCAA championship for UConn this year, an extra 3% chance. How is that weird?

O.K. since I'm a glutton for punishment let's look at this from another angle.

Yes, scoring more points is better. No argument there. But couldn't there be like 20 different ways for them to score 1 more point if you think it raises their probability to win the championship?

The team's overall field goal percentage is 47.53%, which is 71st in the country. If they raised that about .5% that would give them about an extra point. Isn't 71st in the country about the same as 78th in the country (their free throw percentage rank)? If they were shooting 48.03% from the field that would put that them at about 59th in the country. Wouldn't it be easier to get a 1/2 a basket a game more than raise their free throw percentage by 5%?

What about 3 point shooting? They're hitting 36.84% from 3 which is 73rd in the country. Again, about the same rank as their free throw shooting. If they could raise that a little there's the same 1 point extra a game.

What if they turned the ball over less? That would give them more shots and even if they kept the same overall shooting percentage would easily give them that extra point. They're turning the ball over 13 times a game, good for 165th in the country. If they turned the ball over 12 times a game instead then there's that same point. 12 turnovers a game would put them at about 84th in the country, again about the same ranking as their free throws. Seems they should work on turning the ball over less since that's a bigger problem than their free throw shooting.

There are a million things they could do better if they want to score 1 more point. Probably things that are easier to achieve than 5% more free throws.

My point again is that their free throw shooting is not bad enough to be as scrutinized as you are doing. It's an easy target. It's not a fatal flaw.

 

[Waquoit]

And they are the ones who need to lead the stand up Gampel/Hartford chants to get the arena more rowdy.

The next crowd at the XL will put the library patrons at the OSU game to shame. And at the XL, the true longtime UConn fans that attend games there lead the cheers, the student secion follows. These are the facts gleaned from in person observation, not from keyboard commandos who watch at games home.

 

[bigknight3]

The next crowd at the XL will put the library patrons at the OSU game to shame. And at the XL, the true longtime UConn fans that attend games there lead the cheers, the student secion follows. These are the facts gleaned from in person observation, not from keyboard commandos who watch at games home.

Been to every game. Season ticket holder, so don't know who you're talking to...

 

[pj]

O.K. since I'm a glutton for punishment let's look at this from another angle.

Yes, scoring more points is better. No argument there. But couldn't there be like 20 different ways for them to score 1 more point if you think it raises their probability to win the championship?

The team's overall field goal percentage is 47.53%, which is 71st in the country. If they raised that about .5% that would give them about an extra point. Isn't 71st in the country about the same as 78th in the country (their free throw percentage rank)? If they were shooting 48.03% from the field that would put that them at about 59th in the country. Wouldn't it be easier to get a 1/2 a basket a game more than raise their free throw percentage by 5%?

What about 3 point shooting? They're hitting 36.84% from 3 which is 73rd in the country. Again, about the same rank as their free throw shooting. If they could raise that a little there's the same 1 point extra a game.

What if they turned the ball over less? That would give them more shots and even if they kept the same overall shooting percentage would easily give them that extra point. They're turning the ball over 13 times a game, good for 165th in the country. If they turned the ball over 12 times a game instead then there's that same point. 12 turnovers a game would put them at about 84th in the country, again about the same ranking as their free throws. Seems they should work on turning the ball over less since that's a bigger problem than their free throw shooting.

There are a million things they could do better if they want to score 1 more point. Probably things that are easier to achieve than 5% more free throws.

My point again is that their free throw shooting is not bad enough to be as scrutinized as you are doing. It's an easy target. It's not a fatal flaw.

Every aspect of the game has potential room for improvement. It's the job of the coaches to figure out where the team can improve and invest their effort there. I have no idea if free throw shooting is an area they should focus on or not. I happen to believe that their free throw shooting percentage will increase over the course of the season, but we shall see.

You're arguing against a straw man here -- against positions I never took.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

I've found the free throw back-and-forth interesting, because I had a first half concern about a couple or more individual free throws, probably DC's double miss.

During this period, the score was tight, but it didn't feel like the foul disparity was being leveraged enough. Then the dam broke open with the run, followed by a tense-at-times second half when OSU wouldn't just go away. Mostly, I was anxious because the game wasn't a blowout.

I've been persuaded that the current first quadrant free throw percentage is not worrisome, but I've also had more tolerance for those who have taken and shared a deeper look than being unhappy about the team missing 2 more free throws than the box score shows. I've seen no need for the derision directed toward those who have offered some numbers in support of their comments that have been labeled "weird." This does not mean that I've flipped to disbelieving that a. 736 FT shouldn't be a source of concern, but I did indulge my own curiosity.

I looked at where UConn ranked in FTA, FTM, and FT% for the 4 NC seasons, the 2009 FF, and the 2002 & 2006 E8 losses that 'felt' at the time (and since) most like NCs that could-to-should have happened.

I'm not going to articulate the numbers in the attached handwritten image other than to say (1) that these numbers represent a plausible basis for a currently felt sense (even if someone can prove it to be inaccurate) that a non-P5 team has a slimmer margin for error in getting a top-level seed and that UConn's FT% ranking has shined in recent NC runs, as well as the so-called "shock the world" original. (FTR, I was not "shocked," but I was profoundly overjoyed and anxious throughout as to the outcome); (2) the 2004 team was the pre-season #1 pick that lost 7 games en route to the NC, and FT% goes jump out as a weakness; and (3) this year's 9-game sample shows high rankings for FTA & FTM, but those were the case in 2006 & 2009.

I draw no conclusions strong enough to harshly dismiss those who place a high premium on elite FT% ranking, but that may be influenced by my desire for every UConn shot to look good and go in the basket.

 

[Greathusky]

I think this is the 3rd time I've posted this since last night. They shot 24-33 last night which is 72.7%. Right around their season average of 73.6% which puts them at 81st in the country out of 352 teams.

Serious question and I need an answer to this. What would you suggest is an acceptable percentage for the team to shoot this season? If you're expecting something like 80%, which would mean they hit 2-3 more free throws last night, then that's unrealistic since 80% would put them in the top 10 teams in college basketball.

If they shoot 73% from the line one game and lose then I would point to a lot of other things they did wrong to lose a game rather than missing a couple free throws.

I am guessing that if we clank three front end of 1 and 1s and lose a sweet 16 game by two points, you would be thinking about those missed opportunities.

 

[AntG168]

I am guessing that if we clank three front end of 1 and 1s and lose a sweet 16 game by two points, you would be thinking about those missed opportunities.

You can say that every game you lose about any stat

 

[HooperScooper]

I am guessing that if we clank three front end of 1 and 1s and lose a sweet 16 game by two points, you would be thinking about those missed opportunities.

I hear you, but if they shot 74% from the line for the game then I'm sure there are going to be a lot of reasons they lost the game. What if they shot 85% from the line for the game and missed 2 front ends and lost by 1? Are you still upset about the 2 front end misses? Missed free throws are such an easy target to blame.

Again, yes making more free throws is better than making less. No argument there. But you're never going to make them all so you need to have realistic expectations on that part of the game.