I still Don't Get it

9erken · February 15, 2009, 4:53am

Otherwise, they will pack it in, which will mean we then have to shoot them because Harris does not penetrate against a zone.

Why doesn't Harris penetrate against the zone? I would think he's quick enough to do so. It'd also be nice to see Jones get the ball around the free throw line more in the zone. And Mack is terrible at those quick threes on the break, I'd rather see him set up on the block, then drift out to 3 only late in the shot clock if he can't get anything going in the mid-range. But others have been saying this for a while, so there must be a good reason we don't do that. Ideas?

We seem to consistently beat terrible teams, so that’s an improvement on last year. I’m glad we won today.

HP49er · February 15, 2009, 4:54am

[QUOTE=J Felt;384140]Plus, Coley’s dunk at the end of the first half was D-I-S-G-U-S-T-I-N-G, disgusting.[/QUOTE]
They’re currently uploading but here’s a small treat for you, Feltis…

[CENTER][/CENTER]

Max_Power · February 15, 2009, 4:57am

[QUOTE=HP49er;384144]They’re currently uploading but here’s a small treat for you, Feltis…

[CENTER][/CENTER][/QUOTE]

Great pic.

J_Felt · February 15, 2009, 5:04am

They're currently uploading but here's a small treat for you, Feltis...
[CENTER][/CENTER]

I like Shaggy’s facial expression there in the bottom left corner.

The ref seems to be in awe as well.

I almost felt bad for Edwards, that had to be demoralizing.

X-49er · February 15, 2009, 5:18am

[QUOTE=TRLeader;384131]I have never mentioned anything about our perimeter defense.[/QUOTE]

Indeed.

[QUOTE=TRLeader;384131]Newsflash…teams already pack it in against us…I would too…we shoot 29.9%.[/QUOTE]

Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmmmm. If teams pack it in against us and we have a very undersized PG that either cannot or will not penetrate a zone defense, what exactly do you suggest we do to spread the defense so we can take the ball inside for layups and dunks? There is a shot clock, so we can’t get a 2 point lead and hold the ball at half court until they come out of the zone. Dumping it down low in a zone is asking for a turnover at least half of the time, and hitting the open man at the free throw line for a 15 footer likely produces the same percentage as what we shoot from behind the arc, but for 1 less point.

[QUOTE=Mullins Maniac;384135]Math is correct but the logic is bad. Here’s why:
1 - You are extremely less likely to get fouled shooting a three versus a two.[/QUOTE]

You are also guaranteed to score 1 more point making a three versus making a two.

[QUOTE=Mullins Maniac;384135]2 - Going 6 of 18 from three vs 9 of 18 from two means you had three more fruitless possesions.
3 - Going 6 of 18 versus from three versus 9 of 18 from two means you just created three more possesions for the opposing team.[/QUOTE]

Say what? The opponent gets a possession whether we make the shot or not. Quit criticizing math skills when you have none yourself.

[QUOTE=Mullins Maniac;384135]X is correct, teams will try to run the ball against the Steelers and the Ravens even thoug they know they can’t. The difference is, most of those teams can run the ball against [B]other[/B] teams outside of the Steelers and the Ravens. We can’t shoot the three versus [B]anybody.[/B][/QUOTE]

We also can’t attack a zone against most of the teams we play, unless Dijuan more closely matches up with them in size. So, read what I said above.

[QUOTE=9erken;384143]Why doesn’t Harris penetrate against the zone? I would think he’s quick enough to do so. [/QUOTE]

He definitely has the quickness, but he is undersized. That does not mean he can’t penetrate, but his success rate if/when he does is going to be lower because he won’t be passing the ball over anyone when he gets in there and is swarmed by the defense. That being said, Gerrity was only 6’1" and he was pretty good at it.

ninerball49 · February 15, 2009, 5:28am

someone give an’juan wilderness the effing ball. we need plays with him and ra’shad cutting to the BASKET. i completely agree that we don’t use this offense to its strengths. it won’t hurt as much next year when we have players that can knock down those shots…but it wouldnt hurt to at least balance it out by doing different things…we just need to get our slashers the ball going to the rim much more.

J_Felt · February 15, 2009, 5:36am

someone give an'juan wilderness the effing ball. we need plays with him and ra'shad cutting to the BASKET. i completely agree that we don't use this offense to its strengths. it won't hurt as much next year when we have players that can knock down those shots..but it wouldnt hurt to at least balance it out by doing different things..we just need to get our slashers the ball going to the rim much more.

The play that gave Church his first FG of the season should be run once or twice a game for Anjuan and Rashad.

Anjuan is flashing across the lane on almost every play, but many times it is an attempt to pull an extra defender to free the shooter.

49or_bust · February 15, 2009, 5:39am

What’s Charles’s record with the fro now?

X-49er · February 15, 2009, 5:44am

[QUOTE=49or bust;384154]What’s Charles’s record with the fro now?[/QUOTE]

1-something. I’m pretty sure that was our first win with the 'fro.

The_Lax · February 15, 2009, 5:59am

[QUOTE=49or bust;384154]What’s Charles’s record with the fro now?[/QUOTE]

1-2, i think. He played the Maryland and Richmond games last year with the fro.

eason49 · February 15, 2009, 6:04am

From the stats page:

[U] Nearly Invisible [/U]
5 Gaby Ngoundjo

:lmao:

Niner89 · February 15, 2009, 11:28am

[QUOTE=X-49er;384149]. . . .

You are also guaranteed to score 1 more point making a three versus making a two.

Say what? The opponent gets a possession whether we make the shot or not. Quit criticizing math skills when you have none yourself.

We also can’t attack a zone against most of the teams we play, unless Dijuan more closely matches up with them in size. So, read what I said above.

[/QUOTE]

You’re wasting your time with the joker from heeeeekory, X-49er. His tail ain’t even at the game since '97 and he’s an expert . . .

9erken · February 15, 2009, 1:38pm

He definitely has the quickness, but he is undersized. That does not mean he can't penetrate, but his success rate if/when he does is going to be lower because he won't be passing the ball over anyone when he gets in there and is swarmed by the defense. That being said, Gerrity was only 6'1" and he was pretty good at it.

I think you're right that it's tougher. But Harris is no smaller than some other point guards that could penetrate effectively (Drew Lavender comes to mind at 5'7", Levance Fields at Pitt is 5'10"). Occasionally they get stuffed too, but often they were kicking it out for a wide open three. Maybe he needs to work on the tear drop in the offseason and the rest of our guys need proper spacing on the outside (which kills a collapsing zone). Then again, they'd still need to hit the wide-open shot consistently. But at least they wouldn't be running off of screens to get open, which none of our guys seem to be very good at this year.

ninerfan55 · February 15, 2009, 3:30pm

[QUOTE=ninerball49;384151]someone give an’juan wilderness the effing ball. we need plays with him and ra’shad cutting to the BASKET. i completely agree that we don’t use this offense to its strengths. it won’t hurt as much next year when we have players that can knock down those shots…but it wouldnt hurt to at least balance it out by doing different things…we just need to get our slashers the ball going to the rim much more.[/QUOTE]

completly agree.

hootie · February 15, 2009, 4:03pm

Good win over a horrible GW team.

Yes, we shoot too many three’s. Can’t believe the thread went 3 pages.

Actually I take that back- nothing wrong with shooting them, missing them is the problem. 12- 27 is perfectly acceptable to me, hell I love it. The issue is the guys we have can’t do that against air (Ian maybe, but that’s his only plus) much less with coming off of a screen with a hand in the face.

But, that’s Bobby Ball. He loves the 3’s. It’s his drug and we’re all addicted as long as he’s here. I’m pulling for him to get some guys in here that can run his system. I’m hopeful for the next couple of years.

I’ve probably been as critical of Lutz as anyone and I stand by all of it. However, I hope he turns things around we go to the dance the next few years. If that happens I’ll come back form the dark side.

system · February 15, 2009, 4:16pm

[QUOTE=hootie;384199]
But, that’s Bobby Ball. He loves the 3’s. It’s his drug and we’re all addicted as long as he’s here. I’m pulling for him to get some guys in here that can run his system. I’m hopeful for the next couple of years.
[/QUOTE]

This.

We all know that Bobby can’t adjust to his players. He needs a certain kind of player to be able to run his system. If he doesn’t have that, he’ll run his system anyway, it will just produce a terrible result.

I remember in years past when we were low on shooters, some people thought, “great, we’ll be forced to take it inside”. Not really. We will always have a couple players in the lead for 3 pt attempts in the conference. Whether they can shoot or not.

Good to get a conf win. Maybe we will actually play in the A10 tournament afterall.

Normmm · February 16, 2009, 5:40pm

Except for it isn't. That is a statistic I hate seen thrown around.
If I shoot 30-100 threes, that gives the opponent a chance at 70 rebounds.
If I shoot 45-100 2 pts, the opponent is only getting 55 shots at the rebound.

Math is correct but the logic is bad. Here's why [list type=decimal] [*]You are extremely less likely to get fouled shooting a three versus a two. [*]Going 6 of 18 from three vs 9 of 18 from two means you had three more fruitless possesions. [*]Going 6 of 18 versus from three versus 9 of 18 from two means you just created three more possesions for the opposing team [/LIST]

It is the same thing. The fruitless possession isn’t true. The other team gets the ball back whether we make the basket or not. It doesn’t change that we would still either be 6 for 18 or 9 for 18.

In other words, if we go 9 for 18 from 2, the defense still gets the ball after a made possession. The defense would get roughly 18 possessions, 9 from rebounds and 9 from in bounds after made basket. The offense has 18 points. If we go 6 for 18 from 3, the defense still gets roughly 18 possessions, 12 from rebounds and 6 from in bounds after a made basket. But the offense still has 18 points.

This does assume the defense always gets the rebound. It is hard to determine how this affects offensive rebounds. Many believe the rebound from a 3 point shot can actually benefit the offense as it general causes a long rebound. Where as the 2 point bucket causes a shorter rebound, where the defense is in better rebounding position than they may be on the perimeter.

CharSFNiners · February 16, 2009, 6:08pm

It is the same thing. The fruitless possession isn't true. The other team gets the ball back whether we make the basket or not. It doesn't change that we would still either be 6 for 18 or 9 for 18.
In other words, if we go 9 for 18 from 2, the defense still gets the ball after a made possession. The defense would get roughly 18 possessions, 9 from rebounds and 9 from in bounds after made basket. The offense has 18 points. If we go 6 for 18 from 3, the defense still gets roughly 18 possessions, 12 from rebounds and 6 from in bounds after a made basket. But the offense still has 18 points.

This does assume the defense always gets the rebound. It is hard to determine how this affects offensive rebounds. Many believe the rebound from a 3 point shot can actually benefit the offense as it general causes a long rebound. Where as the 2 point bucket causes a shorter rebound, where the defense is in better rebounding position than they may be on the perimeter.

I think their point is if you make a basket, theoretically, the team is able to set up on defense. A missed basket, especially long distance shots that turn into long rebounds, can and likely turn into run outs or transition baskets for the other team. Then factor in the way this team rebounds, and/or follows their shots (most teams are horrible at this).

Also, shooting 9-18 for 2 instead of 6-18 for three would likely suggest more highly contested shots that could result in fouls in your favor. I’m sorry but I’d prefer my team to be going 9-18 from inside the arc any day over 6-18 from 3 due to the above mentioned reasons. To each his own though.

9erken · February 16, 2009, 6:24pm

It is the same thing. The fruitless possession isn't true. The other team gets the ball back whether we make the basket or not. It doesn't change that we would still either be 6 for 18 or 9 for 18.
In other words, if we go 9 for 18 from 2, the defense still gets the ball after a made possession. The defense would get roughly 18 possessions, 9 from rebounds and 9 from in bounds after made basket. The offense has 18 points. If we go 6 for 18 from 3, the defense still gets roughly 18 possessions, 12 from rebounds and 6 from in bounds after a made basket. But the offense still has 18 points.

This does assume the defense always gets the rebound. It is hard to determine how this affects offensive rebounds. Many believe the rebound from a 3 point shot can actually benefit the offense as it general causes a long rebound. Where as the 2 point bucket causes a shorter rebound, where the defense is in better rebounding position than they may be on the perimeter.

The difference of course is the opportunity to set up the defense before the other team brings the ball down the floor (particularly if you want to use any kind of trapping), the reduced likelihood of getting fouled, and the seemingly streaky nature of 3-point shooting. Fast break opportunities almost always come off of either turnovers or missed shots (particularly those long rebounds).

I think the obvious bigger issue is the quality of the look. This year we have done this fewer, but it drives me crazy to see a player rise up with a defender right there and take a long shot, despite it being early in the shot clock (or sometimes on a fast break despite being covered!). At this point, we haven’t even attempted to stretch the defense to give that or another player a more open look, to make their defenders work a bit, and to keep open the possibility of an easy shot opening up down low. This has been my biggest problem with the Lutz offense, the freedom he gives shooters to take horrible shots early in the shot clock. Usually we have a guy that can hit enough of those to keep us moderately successful if inconsistent, but this year we don’t even have that.

somosdel · February 16, 2009, 7:50pm

[QUOTE=49or bust;384154]What’s Charles’s record with the fro now?[/QUOTE]

Per Charlie’s facebook he is getting rid of the fro on Feb 28th b/c Iverson got rid of his hair…yeah random I know but NNN is slow so what the hell