I was taking a quick peak at the schedule, and I gotta say it sets up nicely for what our team is. These numbers are from barttorvik (like kenpom only a free site with equations a bit different). We only play 2 teams the rest of the way with a defense in the top 70, Mississippi St. and UCF.
2 others looked like they could potentially give our offense trouble and thats UNLV and Temple. UNLV is 23rd in the country at defending 2 point shots, and Temple is 9th in the country at preventing offensive rebounds.
With us being able to patchwork the offense and get some production from the bigs, i think our season can set up nicely for us. I was pretty concerned about our offense against solid defenses, but if we don't really play any then it won't be a problem.
I think this is the most positive thing you’ve ever said... what’s the catch
Arkansas-Pine Bluff (2-4)
Tuesday, November 27th
7:00 PM Fox Sports OH/ESPN 3
Lets get in the 80s tomorrow night and pad the stat sheet.
Hearing that Cumberland might be out.
Hope we can keep building the confidence of Fredericks and get Johnson back on track. Get Diara out there as well as Ellie. Would be a great game for Moore to knock the cobwebs loose.
I think Brooks, Scott, Williams, Broome, Cumberland, Jenifer probably don't need this game as much as the others. Get up 20 points early and get these guys back on the bench for the subs.
Fredericks shot is not going in but his form doesn't look bad. II would love it if fredericks never shot another 3. fredericks is shooting 80% from 2. it's ok to not be a good 3 point shooter. we let rubles fire off 43 of them his jr year, he only took 3 as a sr.
Fredericks shot is not going in but his form doesn't look bad. I
Really think he has a much better chance of making a few then I ever felt about Rubles.
It would certainly help if he could get it figured out. I would settle for the mid point between 44 and 31.funny thing about fredericks is he shot 44.2% on his first 120 3's in juco.
then shot 31% on his next 190 attempts.
i dont know if the mechanics of his shot changed or maybe he grew or something, but something went haywire and it hasn't been corrected. i remember thinking his form looks off but i can't remember what it looks like off the top of my head, i want to say i think he brings the ball too far back behind his head.
It would certainly help if he could get it figured out. I would settle for the mid point between 44 and 31.
I would love it if fredericks never shot another 3. fredericks is shooting 80% from 2. it's ok to not be a good 3 point shooter. we let rubles fire off 43 of them his jr year, he only took 3 as a sr.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/the-two-simple-strategies-that-coach-k-often-uses-for-duke-but-most-college-coaches-do-not/
i enjoyed this article as it discusses two things that the greatest college coach ever does that our coach does not do.
i'm a supporter of mick, but i wish he would come around on these subjects, especially on the 2 first half fouls one with regard to cumberland.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/the-two-simple-strategies-that-coach-k-often-uses-for-duke-but-most-college-coaches-do-not/
i enjoyed this article as it discusses two things that the greatest college coach ever does that our coach does not do.
i'm a supporter of mick, but i wish he would come around on these subjects, especially on the 2 first half fouls one with regard to cumberland.
we didn't even get a 1v0 correct last game at the end of the first half, nevermind properly getting 2 possessions to 1. which i think is why a lot of college coaches don't try to get their players to do it, because you can't trust them to take good shots.
the 2 foul thing makes it sound like coaches should be trying to maximize the playing time of their best players and best lineup combinations. that just doesn't sound like smart basketball.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/the-two-simple-strategies-that-coach-k-often-uses-for-duke-but-most-college-coaches-do-not/
i enjoyed this article as it discusses two things that the greatest college coach ever does that our coach does not do.
i'm a supporter of mick, but i wish he would come around on these subjects, especially on the 2 first half fouls one with regard to cumberland.
https://kenpom.com/blog/introducing-2-foul-participation/As I discovered when looking at this issue in 2016, players are more conservative defensively when they get in foul trouble, so expecting coaches to ignore the situation is unrealistic if they are doing their jobs right.
Furthermore, there are reasons you’d rather have a player available for the end of a potentially close game than just simply playing him until he fouls out. On the flip side, a player whose effectiveness is reduced due to foul trouble might still be better than the alternatives and if that player isn’t particularly foul-prone to begin with, there’s little need to bench him. Naturally, each coach handles these decisions differently. (And because this issue doesn’t seem to be well-understood, I suspect many are using a sub-optimal approach.)
...
[2-Foul Participation] was around 20% for all of big-time college basketball last season, a number that has been dropping steadily since 2010, the first season for which we have complete play-by-play data. Coaches are gradually getting more conservative about playing guys with foul trouble in the first half. Even with foul rates declining to historic lows last season, coaches were less willing to play a guy after he picked up his second foul. It makes one wonder if there is a level of fouling low enough to make coaches reconsider their philosophy.
https://kenpom.com/blog/foul-trouble-as-defined-by-players/The main argument against sitting players in foul trouble is that players rarely foul out and sitting them is just depriving the best players of playing time. However, you could reframe the debate. Instead of maximizing minutes for his best players, a coach’s job is also to minimize bad minutes. There’s a self-preservation instinct in most players and in situations where that instinct is the strongest, there figures to be a negative impact on the player’s defense.
Hey, maybe the best coach would train his players to play the same way regardless of their foul count.4 If that was accomplished, then we could focus on the goal of maximizing minutes. But it seems that players will never be able to ignore the reality that once they get a fifth foul, their playing time is permanently reduced to zero for what could be the most exciting parts of the game.
That’s a big incentive to reduce one’s foul rate after getting into foul trouble and become a defensive liability. While I wouldn’t side with the most extreme coaches that refuse to play guys in foul trouble, there’s plenty of evidence to suggest that ignoring foul trouble isn’t a viable approach, either.