Two primary reasons we lost; poor 3 point shooting with many open loops; and Hunter out gave AU a 3929 rebounding margin.

How bad is Dean's injury?

Thanks GW0509 and LSF! That definitely makes sense now GW0509 re: baggage.

GWRising wrote:

As to Max - he is really a freshman in terms of experience and a year out from injury. He is going through freshman growing pains. Because some here put unreasonable expectations on him (see above) does not suggest that he is a bust or not good. He is just not ready yet to contribute consistently. Let him develop without the expectations. He is expected to be part of the foundation moving forward. Again, a freshman in every meaningful aspect.

I was about to agree with 100% of this until I saw the third sentence. The "see above" comment that I made was not me trying to put unreasonable expectations on Max. The fact that he is averaging nearly 30 minutes a game as a freshmen (I believe CC said that's around 15th in the country or something among freshmen) already suggests that more is expected of him than the average freshmen. Ideally, he would be eased in but we simply didn't do enough in the offseason for that to happen so he's become a person we need some production from right away. That's not putting expectations on him but just a fact. No one is saying he's a bust or not good - that's ludicrous given the guy hasn't even played 10 games yet in his CBB career. Not sure how that conclusion was drawn. You will say this year doesn't matter (and probably next year as well given the number of new players that will have to be integrated) which is true to an extent but the goal remains to win as many games as possible, especially for the senior class.

Max will have his ups and downs but his energy along the sidelines has felt off for a couple games now. Max may be a freshman in "all aspects" but his energy along the sidelines and in game is something in his control. Being a freshman shouldn't excuse that. I can understand that happening for one game but a string of games isn't ideal in my opinion (to put it the nicest way possible).
 

It's worth talking a bit more about shot selection.   I'll preface this by saying that I do not need any lectures about advanced analytics, effective field goal percentage, or how a 40% shooter from 3 is the equivalent of a 60% shooter from 2 (though the two point shooter has greater chances at being fouled while shooting).

Let's also add that opponents and game circumstances can and should enter into any strategy involving taking three point shots.  It stands to reason that when we play an overly athletic team like Dayton or VCU, we will have a harder than average time converting two point shots.  Therefore, in order to win games like these, three point shooting ought to be considered critically important.  Conversely, there are opponents, like American, where it should stand to reason that we play like the more athletically gifted team.  This means more drives to the basket, more inside finishes, and more trips to the foul line, along of course with a far less reliance on shooting 3's.  It seems to me that if you're going to go against the grain, you better have a really strong three point shooting team.

Our three point shooting isn't pitiful, but by no means is it anything close to great.  This team is guilty of playing the way a great three point shooting team would play.  Against AU, they shot 1-12 in the first half from 3 while shooting 7-15 from 2.  In the second half, the team shot 6-17 from 3 and 7-11 from 2.  This means that for the game, we shot 7-29 from 3 and 14-26 from 2.  We attempted three more three point shots against American University than we did two more shots.  (Yes, Hunter was out, but how many shots does he attempt per game?  The answer is not nearly enough.)  We missed 11 of 12 three point shots while falling behind at halftime by 6 points.

Ricky Lindo shot 7-7 from the floor on two pointers and 0-2 on three pointers.  You can refer to just two three point attempts as a nickpick but then again, we lost the game by just two possessions.  It's not that Ricky can't make a three point shot but at some point, don't you have to whether someone who has made 5 of 21 three point shots should be taking even around two of these every game?  Sure, you can say that it's no big deal but keep in mind that so many games are decided by just a small handful of possessions.  James shot 1-5 from 3 which brought his season-long total to under 30% while attempting the second highest number of attempts from 3 on the team (2 behind Brendan).  Keegan had a rough day from 3 but much like Sloan Seymour, if he's in the game, you want him launching because this is his specialty.  Aside from Keegan, EJ and Max, I'm not sure I am comfortable with anyone else's three point shooting consistency (I'll contend that 1-5 from Keegan was an aberration.)  .  Brendan either shows up with his shooting or he just doesn't have it.  It's normally feast or famine with him.

It's reached the point where James might be leading a fast break and instead of a player on each side filling a lane ready to finish with a layup or dunk, the players are running the court and then migrating to the corners, behind the three point line.  It literally looks like a pickup basketball game, and while you may look at this as efficient basketball, I view it as inefficient when you are foregoing an automatic 2 for an attempted 3 that has a substantially less chance of going in.

So you might ask yourself, isn't a wide open look from 3 what you want?  Isn't this a "good look" that coaches want for their players?  The answer is sometimes.  It's not when the alternative is a totally simple two point dunk or layup.  It's not when your outside shots are not falling but you insist on heaving them up anyway.  It's not when you have an athleticism advantage that you are negating simply based on settling for 3's. Missing 3's very often plays right into an opponent's hands.

Regarding Rising's post....

1) There seemed to be a Noel Brown fan club coming from within Kenner who sang his praises every chance they got.  I don't know how many of our posters bought the hype to be honest.  I was very explicit in my comments at that time.  Said that he was not a low post player, still lacked great hands and solid footwork.  His value was in finishing and this has been the case so far this season.  Noel can finish fast breaks, put back offensive rebounds, and occasionally convert on a pass made cliose to the basket when he's not playing in the post.

2) As for Max, I sang his praises based on what I saw at Kenner but also predicted that in no way would he be a star this season.  Thought he would often defer to James and perhaps others.  Despite the growing pains, I still see a very dynamic and complete player.  

 

Last edited by Gwmayhem (12/12/2022 11:12 am)