This site reads like a roller coaster. We win a game and we are on path to getting into the Tourney next year. We lose a game and some are ready to jump off a bridge.
JC is finishing up his 1st year of a 4 year contract (don't think it's a 3 year deal and could be a 5 year deal but only JC and GWRising know for sure). We will likely lose 3 out of the remaining 4 games but next year will determine whether or not JC is the right coach. If he shows improvement every year, he's the man who will get us back. If not, he will just have set the rebuilding project back from what should have been 2-3 years after ML (had they hired the right coach instead of Nero hiring Mojo) to 8-10 years. Most of us old timers will be dead and buried by then.
Recruiting will play a very important role. I just don't see it yet with the recruits and transfers we have been getting.
So for the rest of the season just sit back and enjoy and hope we have a good and productive off season.

Can someone explain the analytics of not having anyone line up on he blocks when GW is shooting a free throw?  To me it makes no sense, and I agree that it made even less sense at the end of the game Saturday

Gwmayhem wrote:

The Ross-Man! wrote:

Can someone explain the analytics of not having anyone line up on he blocks when GW is shooting a free throw?  To me it makes no sense, and I agree that it made even less sense at the end of the game Saturday

I believe the rationale is as follows:  First, there is a likelihood, certainly better than 50/50, that the free throws will be made.  So, there will often not be an offensive rebound to be had.  Next, because the shooting team receives less desirable positioning along the free throw line, the likelihood is for a defensive rebound after a miss.  The coaching staff probably assumes that the likelihood of grabbing an offensive rebound off of any free throw i(including the successful ones) is less than 5%.  Maybe about the same as committing a silly foul.

I actually looked this up a few weeks ago and posted about it, but yes this is about right. If I remember correctly, the defensive team gets the rebound 85% of the time off of a free throw miss, and the offensive team gets the rebound 15% of the time. So say a team shoots 65% from the foul line (actually lower than what we shoot), there's a 35% chance of a miss, and a 15% chance of getting the rebound, which means any free throw has about a 5% chance of resulting in an offensive rebound. Also, I realized that when Juice was in the game over the weekend, he was allowed to line up on free throws and go for the rebound, presumably because he has the strength and hops to get an offensive rebound. So there's probably a personnel factor as well in which the coaching staff puts the chance of getting an offensive rebound with our regular starters at less than 5%. I think it makes sense.  

Last edited by Hugh (2/25/2020 9:50 am)

Gwmayhem wrote:

The Ross-Man! wrote:

Can someone explain the analytics of not having anyone line up on he blocks when GW is shooting a free throw?  To me it makes no sense, and I agree that it made even less sense at the end of the game Saturday

I believe the rationale is as follows:  First, there is a likelihood, certainly better than 50/50, that the free throws will be made.  So, there will often not be an offensive rebound to be had.  Next, because the shooting team receives less desirable positioning along the free throw line, the likelihood is for a defensive rebound after a miss.  The coaching staff probably assumes that the likelihood of grabbing an offensive rebound off of any free throw i(including the successful ones) is less than 5%.  Maybe about the same as committing a silly foul.

Next,  by bringing the other players off the line, this serves two purposes.  First, it allows the defense to be back in position which eliminates any fast break opportunity by the rebounding team.  Plus, with four players averaging over 31 minutes of playing time per game, this move does conserve energy and is likely intended in part to keep our guys as fresh as possible.

So, that's my guess as to why they do this.  And, in certain situations, for example when Maceo or Jamison are at the line where they are practically automatic, I can completely understand this.  Even as a general rule, I do understand it.  But, exceptions should be made to most every rule and down the stretch on Saturday was one of those times for the reasons I suggested earlier.   

Mostly agree except you need to emphasize one big factor which you mentioned but didn't provide enough emphasis ... times a team scores off rebound transition on a missed free throw. So it's a cumulative thing ... percentage of makes for shooter (high), percentage of offensive rebounds garnered off of missed FTs (low) and percentage of scoring off FT rebound transition (unknown to us but likely known to JC and staff - could be high or low). So this varies by opponent and free throw shooter which is why you see us sometimes put players in and other times take them out. Teams that push well off of missed free throws would tend to make us stay off all other things being equal. Finally, it may just be that we don't guard transition as well as JC would like regardless of anything else and JC would rather set his defense. It would be hard to support or criticize unless you knew all the variables here. I assume JC and staff know why they are doing this in each and every scenario and are playing the percentages. Of course, when you play percentages, it doesn't always work out in each and every case.

Free Quebec wrote:

Joel, there’s no way to know if the recruits are good enough or not yet. None of us know. And with the transfer rules the way they are - and the possibility of no-sit transfers coming very soon, everything could look different anyway.

There’s no reason for you to assume the worst right now.

Of course FQ. But Joel always assumes the worst here. And it's likely five years in case you were wondering Joel lol..We haven't even completed year one yet. I would remind you of the net +/- wins (from previous year) for GW coaches in their first year.

Mike Jarvis (+5 overall/+4 in conference)
Tom Penders (-4 overall/+2 in conference)
Karl Hobbs (-2 overall/-1 in conference)
Mike Lonergan (-7 overall/-5 in conference)
Maurice Joseph (-8 overall/-1 in conference)
Jamion Christian (+3 overall/+2 in conference) with an opportunity to do better.

So Joel must have really been upset and wondering about the past four guys around this time in their first year lol.
 

Last edited by GWRising (2/25/2020 11:08 am)

If not contesting the rebound  when shooting free throws was such a good idea, why don’t more teams do it?   I suspect in our case, it is to mask our  lack of speed  and depth and that once these deficiencies are corrected, we will no longer see this “strategy@.

Long Suffering Fan wrote:

If not contesting the rebound when shooting free throws was such a good idea, why don’t more teams do it? I suspect in our case, it is to mask our lack of speed and depth and that once these deficiencies are corrected, we will no longer see this “strategy@.

You could be correct. Remember analytics is unique to each team and the strategy can be unique to each opponent. So it may dictate a different thing tonight or next year. 
 

Gwmayhem wrote:

GWRising, in this specific instance, we would have had the offensive rebound.  Yet even if you're willing to say that there was such a small chance of happening, why then wouldn't you put guys in position to try for a rebound so that they could foul right away if they didn't get the rebound?  This didn't make any sense if their intent was to foul right away.

You would have to ask JC what the exact thought process was there. As I said I would have had guys on the line and if we didn't get the rebound would have fouled quickly.