Living or Dying by the Three-Ball

Griz & Big Sky Conference Basketball
Post Reply
citay
Posts: 2185
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:07 pm

Let's do the math.

If you shoot 33.3% from three, that is the same as shooting 50% from two.

Over the course of the season, we're shooting a very good 50% from two. Which means if you give up ten more three-pointers to you opponents than you take (as we did today against Sac State), they have the advantage if they make 33.3% of their shots. Today they did, 34.6%. Thursday they did not, 26%.

I'm not complaining about our three-point defense, it is very good, 29.5% on the season. It's just that when you're taking so many fewer three's (about 70 going into today's game, on top of the ten today), your defense HAS to be good to be the equalizer. If it's not, as it wasn't today, you're probably gonna lose.

But what about our offense? On the season we're shooting about 50% from two but 35.3 from three. Which means that for every 100 shots taken, we're likely to do better from three than we are from two by about six points.

Big deal, you say. Six points. How much would I have liked to have an extra six points on the board over the course of this season?

But the frustrating thing is, we have several players shooting 40% or better. Even Vazquez with an off-day from three is still above 40%. So are Kyle Owens, Eddie Egun, Cameron Parker and Brandon Whitney. And Robbie Beasely might be right up there too with more attempts. He looks like a very good shooter, a la his free throw percentage.

I'm just saying we pass up a lot of good looks from three, especially from Vazquez. If he's open, TAKE THAT SHOT! There is no better shot.

Two other things another 80 three-point shots would do for us over the course of the season.

It'd give us more in-game practise. We might improve our overall percentage.

But it'd keep us in games that we trail late and seem out of reach with two-pointers.

Sure, it's a risk. As they say, you "live and die" by the three-ball.

But it seems to me, over the course of this season, we're mostly dying. I wish the three-point shot were a greater part of our game.
User avatar
fanofzoo
Posts: 4266
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 11:08 am
Location: missoula

citay wrote: Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:13 pm Let's do the math.

If you shoot 33.3% from three, that is the same as shooting 50% from two.

Over the course of the season, we're shooting a very good 50% from two. Which means if you give up ten more three-pointers to you opponents than you take (as we did today against Sac State), they have the advantage if they make 33.3% of their shots. Today they did, 34.6%. Thursday they did not, 26%.

I'm not complaining about our three-point defense, it is very good, 29.5% on the season. It's just that when you're taking so many fewer three's (about 70 going into today's game, on top of the ten today), your defense HAS to be good to be the equalizer. If it's not, as it wasn't today, you're probably gonna lose.

But what about our offense? On the season we're shooting about 50% from two but 35.3 from three. Which means that for every 100 shots taken, we're likely to do better from three than we are from two by about six points.

Big deal, you say. Six points. How much would I have liked to have an extra six points on the board over the course of this season?

But the frustrating thing is, we have several players shooting 40% or better. Even Vazquez with an off-day from three is still above 40%. So are Kyle Owens, Eddie Egun, Cameron Parker and Brandon Whitney. And Robbie Beasely might be right up there too with more attempts. He looks like a very good shooter, a la his free throw percentage.

I'm just saying we pass up a lot of good looks from three, especially from Vazquez. If he's open, TAKE THAT SHOT! There is no better shot.

Two other things another 80 three-point shots would do for us over the course of the season.

It'd give us more in-game practise. We might improve our overall percentage.

But it'd keep us in games that we trail late and seem out of reach with two-pointers.

Sure, it's a risk. As they say, you "live and die" by the three-ball.

But it seems to me, over the course of this season, we're mostly dying. I wish the three-point shot were a greater part of our game.
and I wish we would try to uptempo games, has to be hard to recruit for 50's ball
User avatar
PeauxRouge
Posts: 8221
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 11:14 pm

There are quite a few guys on this team that look flat out scared to pull the trigger. I hope this changes.
Sport
Posts: 260
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 3:02 pm
Location: Msla

(There are quite a few guys on this team that look flat out scared to pull the trigger. I hope this changes.)

I tend to agree with PeauxRogue. We had many open looks from 3 that were passed up. Maybe it’s just part of Travis’s game plan. More than once or twice Egun passed up on a three and ended up trying to drive the basket but turned it over. You could see he just didn’t look comfortable driving or shooting the three. Vasquez goes well to the basket, has the ability to throw up a little floater but passes out. 2 of three things could happen, he makes the shot or gets fouled. Or maybe he commits an offensive foul but his moves and body control are so fluid my money is on Josh.
We’re still young and finding our way but we have way to much talent to not get better as the season progresses. I would not want to play us come tournament time. On to the Cats
HelenaHandBasket
Posts: 5422
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2013 12:32 pm

Well, I might suggest that getting outscored by 13 from the foul line and giving up 16 offensive rebounds could be an issue.
Hoops watcher
Posts: 559
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2019 11:15 pm

PeauxRouge wrote: Sat Jan 23, 2021 6:17 pm There are quite a few guys on this team that look flat out scared to pull the trigger. I hope this changes.
Don't like to but have to agree with your point. They hesitate at times and allow the defense time to close. KO hit that big 3 ball late in regulation from the corner, caught it and let fly with conviction, nothing but net. We have several guys that will make a good percentage if they are open, in rhythm and squared up on that shot.
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary. -H L Mencken
User avatar
fanofzoo
Posts: 4266
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 11:08 am
Location: missoula

HelenaHandBasket wrote: Sat Jan 23, 2021 8:47 pm Well, I might suggest that getting outscored by 13 from the foul line and giving up 16 offensive rebounds could be an issue.
16 offensive rebounds !!!

We got a clinic on not having anybody on the team more than 210 pounds
ThinkingGriz
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2019 9:45 am

Interesting post. I believe the things that get overlooked on the issue is ball control for open looks. Both men's and women's teams this year do well when seeing "uncontested" shots. Pressured not so much.
Another variable is not many players get fouled while shooting the three ball as the inside players get hammered often. That leads to free throws. On the women's side they excellent from the charity line.
There are lots of ways to reach high numbers on O. Not having a balance and having key players jacking 3's on an off night leads to struggles.
Hence the term Live or Die by the Three.
Don't diminish the value of balance on O.
User avatar
AZGrizFan
eGriz Club
Posts: 26296
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:34 pm
Location: Texas

HelenaHandBasket wrote: Sat Jan 23, 2021 8:47 pm Well, I might suggest that getting outscored by 13 from the foul line and giving up 16 offensive rebounds could be an issue.
Yep.
Guns kill people like spoons make you fat.
User avatar
fanofzoo
Posts: 4266
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 11:08 am
Location: missoula

AZGrizFan wrote: Mon Jan 25, 2021 5:42 pm
HelenaHandBasket wrote: Sat Jan 23, 2021 8:47 pm Well, I might suggest that getting outscored by 13 from the foul line and giving up 16 offensive rebounds could be an issue.
Yep.
but I saw us fast break, once
tog
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 6:51 pm

Has anyone heard Coach DeCuire address why we don't press/trap more? We lack bulk but have depth, quickness and some wing length. Imagine a lineup of 5 of the following doing a couple 2-minute bursts of full-court pressure per game: Parker, Whitney, Vasquez, Egun, Beasley, Owens and Anderson (who might foul less if he didn't have to bang under the basket). Thoughts?
Sport
Posts: 260
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 3:02 pm
Location: Msla

Press/trap more? I believe that’s on page 26 of the playbook. We’re only up to page 20. I believe page 21 covers “if your open shoot it.”
Post Reply