2019-20 Season

[slufanskip]

15 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

In theory that sounds good but our offense is well equipped to get relatively open 3s and we have 3 really good 3 point shooters (plus Yuri who has been fine in limited attempts). Play to your strengths, not just take the easy shot. There’s a reason we’re getting a ton of mid range attempts, that’s because defenses want you to shoot those.

To put it simply, games like the UMass loss are the issue. We went 5-11 from 3. We were banging 3s and then just stopped shooting them. I know Umass adjusted, but if we can’t design plays to get open looks from deep, what are we even doing?

Actually I think you have the in theory that sounds good backwards. We have three good 3 point shooters but as NH said we don't take many. Why, because the shot just isn't there. Do you actually think we don't want open 3's? Jimerson will help next year, however that will still leave us with just three proven 3 point shooters. Btw … Yuri's 30.8 from 3 is about the same efficiency as the 45% 2 point shot you don't want us taking. Look if we could get Perkins, Jacobs, or Weaver an open 3 or French or Goodwin the ball down low with room or Perkins, Yuri, or JGood an open lane to drive every possession I'm all for shooting less mid range jumpers. However, that's not happening and the reason it's not happening isn't because we don't want it to. 

[glazedandconfused]

1 minute ago, slufanskip said:

Actually I think you have the in theory that sounds good backwards. We have three good 3 point shooters but as NH said we don't take many. Why, because the shot just isn't there. Do you actually think we don't want open 3's? Jimerson will help next year, however that will still leave us with just three proven 3 point shooters. Btw … Yuri's 30.8 from 3 is about the same efficiency as the 45% 2 point shot you don't want us taking. Look if we could get Perkins, Jacobs, or Weaver an open 3 or French or Goodwin the ball down low with room or Perkins, Yuri, or JGood an open lane to drive every possession I'm all for shooting less mid range jumpers. However, that's not happening and the reason it's not happening isn't because we don't want it to. 

Lol you’re just ignoring facts though. We do get a ton of open 3s and we hit a lot of those. And we pass up a lot of lightly contested 3s. And Perkins isn’t a 45% mid range shooter. He’s 45% from 2 point shots not at the rim. The more mid-range that gets, the worse his % likely is.

 

And if we can’t run sets to get some more looks at 3s, then what are the coaches doing?

[NH]

4 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

We are 5th in A10 in 3 point shooting % as a team and an A per Wiz rating system and second in the A10 in wide open catch and shoot  opportunities.

Yes, but both of those stats are presumably propped up by Jimerson's 43%. If you take him out we drop to 8th in the A-10 in percentage, while shooting the fewest of any team (which suggests we are especially judicious in which 3s we are willing to take). To recap, our current roster shoots a below average percentage (both in the A-10 and nationally) while taking only the best looks. 

I'll leave it be as I think I've said all I can on this. I enjoy your posts and appreciate your analytics-bent. It's hard to take this argument seriously when you point to 3-point shooting as a strength, which it so clearly is not. 

[glazedandconfused]

12 minutes ago, NH said:

Yes, but both of those stats are presumably propped up by Jimerson's 43%. If you take him out we drop to 8th in the A-10 in percentage, while shooting the fewest of any team (which suggests we are especially judicious in which 3s we are willing to take). To recap, our current roster shoots a below average percentage (both in the A-10 and nationally) while taking only the best looks. 

I'll leave it be as I think I've said all I can on this. I enjoy your posts and appreciate your analytics-bent. It's hard to take this argument seriously when you point to 3-point shooting as a strength, which it so clearly is not. 

We are the same shooting percentage from 3 in conference play and non-conference play. Perkins and Jacobs have picked up where Jimerson left off.

One last point. As a team we are shooting 34.6% on 2s not at the rim. We have attempted 419 of those. We are shooting 33.7% from 3 as a team and we have attempted 421 of those. 

Just for comparison:

Richmond has taken 170 more 3s than Far 2s

Duq has taken 315 more 3s than far 2s

Bonnies have take 100 more 3s than far 2s

VCU has taken 240 more 3s than far 2s

Dayton has taken almost 300 more 3s than far 2s

 

These are all offenses that are more efficient than ours and none (except Dayton) is significantly more talented. They can find the shots to have a more efficient offense, so could we.

[kmbilliken]

16 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

Lol you’re just ignoring facts though. We do get a ton of open 3s and we hit a lot of those. And we pass up a lot of lightly contested 3s. And Perkins isn’t a 45% mid range shooter. He’s 45% from 2 point shots not at the rim. The more mid-range that gets, the worse his % likely is.

 

And if we can’t run sets to get some more looks at 3s, then what are the coaches doing?

If it isn't broke, don't fix it. Perkins is in a groove. Get him the ball, and let him do his thing.

[RUBillsFan]

30 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

Lol you’re just ignoring facts though. We do get a ton of open 3s and we hit a lot of those. And we pass up a lot of lightly contested 3s. And Perkins isn’t a 45% mid range shooter. He’s 45% from 2 point shots not at the rim. The more mid-range that gets, the worse his % likely is.

 

And if we can’t run sets to get some more looks at 3s, then what are the coaches doing?

I'm not sure you and I have the same definition of mid-range.  In my head, mid-range means any shot that isn't at the rim or a 3 pointer.

Edit: I want to add though that I'm also in favor of us taking more 3 pointers even if they are slightly more contested than the ones we have been taking.  As @glazedandconfused has pointed out, we don't take many 3 pointers (344/353 in the nation), but our % on threes is decent (142/353).  Against D1 competition as a team we shoot 49% from 2 or .98 points per shot and 33.9% from 3 or 1.017 points per shot.  In a perfect world, you take away a few mid-range shots (less lower % 2s = higher 2 pt %) in favor of 3s (replaced w lower % 3s = lower 3 point %) until those points per shot numbers are equal and we're in the optimal position.

I do not, however, think that means totally abandoning the mid-range game.  It just means a couple of less mid-range shots each game in favor of 3s.

Jacobs in particular is the 3 point shooter I'd like to see be more aggressive in taking them.

2nd Edit: I'll probably get killed for this, but against teams who are going to pack it in / zone us in the half court I actually prefer primary lineup  French, Perkins, Goodwin, Jacobs, Weaver as long as Weaver isn't going to get abused on D.  I love Yuri.  He is excellent in the open floor, but for teams that slow it down, take away fast breaks, and force us to shoot over the top, he isn't the best option.

[glazedandconfused]

12 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said:

I'm not sure you and I have the same definition of mid-range.  In my head, mid-range means any shot that isn't at the rim or a 3 pointer.

Edit: I want to add though that I'm also in favor of us taking more 3 pointers even if they are slightly more contested than the ones we have been taking.  As @glazedandconfused has pointed out, we don't take many 3 pointers (344/353 in the nation), but our % on threes is decent (142/353).  Against D1 competition as a team we shoot 49% from 2 or .98 points per shot and 33.9% from 3 or 1.017 points per shot.  In a perfect world, you take away a few mid-range shots (less lower % 2s = higher 2 pt %) in favor of 3s (replaced w lower % 3s = lower 3 point %) until those points per shot numbers are equal and we're in the optimal position.

I do not, however, think that means totally abandoning the mid-range game.  It just means a couple of less mid-range shots each game in favor of 3s.

Jacobs in particular is the 3 point shooter I'd like to see be more aggressive in taking them.

Agreed and no one has said we should totally abandon the mid-range game...that doesn't make sense in practicality.  You and all above have made good points. I'll drop it from here out and thank you all for your insight.

I, in no way mean any of this as a slight to perkins. He's probably my favorite Billiken to watch in a long time and I fully expect 6th MOY and 3rd team all conference this year. Hoping for even higher next year.

[Clock_Tower]

59 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

Actually I think you have the in theory that sounds good backwards. We have three good 3 point shooters but as NH said we don't take many. Why, because the shot just isn't there. Do you actually think we don't want open 3's? Jimerson will help next year, however that will still leave us with just three proven 3 point shooters. Btw … Yuri's 30.8 from 3 is about the same efficiency as the 45% 2 point shot you don't want us taking. Look if we could get Perkins, Jacobs, or Weaver an open 3 or French or Goodwin the ball down low with room or Perkins, Yuri, or JGood an open lane to drive every possession I'm all for shooting less mid range jumpers. However, that's not happening and the reason it's not happening isn't because we don't want it to. 

Generally, I think I agree with you but not sure I agree with this.   Other teams pack the lane and dare us to launch 3 pointers.   We don't take all that many b/c we aren't that good at making 3 pointers - not bc team guard us so well.   Do other teams take away wide open looks from us?  Sure but I would not say they are guarding us on the perimeter.

54 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

Lol you’re just ignoring facts though. We do get a ton of open 3s and we hit a lot of those. And we pass up a lot of lightly contested 3s. And Perkins isn’t a 45% mid range shooter. He’s 45% from 2 point shots not at the rim. The more mid-range that gets, the worse his % likely is.

 

And if we can’t run sets to get some more looks at 3s, then what are the coaches doing?

Why do we want to run set for outside shots if they are not contested and if our guys are not good at making 3 pointers?  Answer:  we don't and our coaches know that.  For the most part, the only 3 pointers we make are the wide open ones.   We simply don't have good 3 point shooters.   Smaller sample sizes provide misleading figures. Over the years, our best 3 pointers were almost NEVER left wide open.    Scott Highmark, Erwin Claggett, Kevin Lisch were guarded and double guarded.  Team never considered playing a zone against us.  We used to set double and triple screens for Scott Highmark.  Why?  because he made the shots! 

54 minutes ago, NH said:

Yes, but both of those stats are presumably propped up by Jimerson's 43%. If you take him out we drop to 8th in the A-10 in percentage, while shooting the fewest of any team (which suggests we are especially judicious in which 3s we are willing to take). To recap, our current roster shoots a below average percentage (both in the A-10 and nationally) while taking only the best looks. 

I'll leave it be as I think I've said all I can on this. I enjoy your posts and appreciate your analytics-bent. It's hard to take this argument seriously when you point to 3-point shooting as a strength, which it so clearly is not. 

Agreed.  We barely make wide open, uncontested 3 point shots.   Cannot remember us even attempting (much less making) truly contested 3 point shots all year.When Jimerson started putting up big numbers (believe he had 2 games where he scored around 25 ppg - one game being Tulane), the other teams truly did start to guard him and contest his shots. Since then, we have only hoped that other teams would guard us.   Jacobs make his first two 3 pointers and teams still won't truly guard him/contest the shots.   Why?   b/c teams are more afraid of getting beat by French than Jacobs, Weaver and Perkins

[The Wiz]

Just some general info on shooting this year... Overall 3 pt shooting is down about 3-3 1/2 % depending if you are a good , ave  or bad shooter...As a result of that,  FG% is also down about 2- 2 1/2% again depending on good , ave or bad.............NCAA ....mission accomplished.

Without listing the entire grade chart... here are some examples...

............3 Pt  past yrs......3P  current yr......FG% past yrs......FG% current yr

A................39.8%...............36.7%..................48.9%................46.5%

C.................35.6.................32.7.....................45.3...................43.1

F..................32.....................28.6.....................41.2...................39.5

On a side note ...Jimerson finished with an A+ in 3P% (42.9%) ...currently listed as 73rd ITN...Unfortunately , he won't make it onto the final year end list which requires 25   3PM...he finishes the year with only 24. 

This year so far, the Bills are C+   3P% and B- in FG%

 

[glazedandconfused]

4 minutes ago, The Wiz said:

Just some general info on shooting this year... Overall 3 pt shooting is down about 3-3 1/2 % depending if you are a good , ave  or bad shooter...As a result of that,  FG% is also down about 2- 2 1/2% again depending on good , ave or bad.............NCAA ....mission accomplished.

Without listing the entire grade chart... here are some examples...

............3 Pt  past yrs......3P  current yr......FG% past yrs......FG% current yr

A................39.8%...............36.7%..................48.9%................46.5%

C.................35.6.................32.7.....................45.3...................43.1

F..................32.....................28.6.....................41.2...................39.5

On a side note ...Jimerson finished with an A+ in 3P% (42.9%) ...currently listed as 73rd ITN...Unfortunately , he won't make it onto the final year end list which requires 25   3PM...he finishes the year with only 24. 

This year so far, the Bills are C+   3P% and B- in FG%

 

Thanks Wiz! Would our FG% be skewed positively because we have attempted less 3pt than almost any other team in country and more 2Pt FG attempts than a lot of teams?

 

Do you know what our 2ptFG% grade is? 

[The Wiz]

23 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

Thanks Wiz! Would our FG% be skewed positively because we have attempted less 3pt than almost any other team in country and more 2Pt FG attempts than a lot of teams?

 

Do you know what our 2ptFG% grade is? 

The short answer is ...yes it is skewed which pushes up the FG%...

2P%...49%  C-

FGA...B-

3PA...F

Side note Dayton leads the nation in FG%   52.1%  and and 2P%...62%

[papal]

Do we have a better chance to get an offensive rebound after a missed 3 rather than after a missed mid-range 2?  My impression is yes but I don't know if there is any data to back it up.  We obviously get many offensive rebounds when we miss shots at the basket (probably 1/3 of Goodwin's  and French's offensive rebounds)

[The Wiz]

10 minutes ago, papal said:

Do we have a better chance to get an offensive rebound after a missed 3 rather than after a missed mid-range 2?  My impression is yes but I don't know if there is any data to back it up.  We obviously get many offensive rebounds when we miss shots at the basket (probably 1/3 of Goodwin's  and French's offensive rebounds)

I don't think there is any data on that....An offensive  rebound is an offensive  rebound....However we are 13th ITN in Off reb...so we get a lot....French gets 31% of them and Goodwin gets 30% each game.

[slufanskip]

12 hours ago, glazedandconfused said:

Lol you’re just ignoring facts though. We do get a ton of open 3s and we hit a lot of those. And we pass up a lot of lightly contested 3s. And Perkins isn’t a 45% mid range shooter. He’s 45% from 2 point shots not at the rim. The more mid-range that gets, the worse his % likely is.

 

And if we can’t run sets to get some more looks at 3s, then what are the coaches doing?

I'm not ignoring anything. You're calling something a fact that isn't. We rank 327th of all D1 teams in 3 pointers attempted ,  328th in 3 pointers made and 159th in 3 pt % . Our oponents have shot 152 more 3's than we have. Those my friend are facts. If it's a fact that 327th is a ton of shots what word would be a fact for 227th? 

You seem to think if you just run a set it will happen. I mean hell, just practice it and do it. How the f..k hard can it be? Sorry but it just doesn't work that way. If it did we'd score a lot more than we do. Do you not think our coaching staff doesn't know that the 3 point shot is generally more efficient than the mid range shot? 

[3star_recruit]

30 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

I'm not ignoring anything. You're calling something a fact that isn't. We rank 327th of all D1 teams in 3 pointers attempted ,  328th in 3 pointers made and 159th in 3 pt % . Our oponents have shot 152 more 3's than we have. Those my friend are facts. If it's a fact that 327th is a ton of shots what word would be a fact for 227th? 

You seem to think if you just run a set it will happen. I mean hell, just practice it and do it. How the f..k hard can it be? Sorry but it just doesn't work that way. If it did we'd score a lot more than we do. Do you not think our coaching staff doesn't know that the 3 point shot is generally more efficient than the mid range shot? 

And even with a dearth of three of point shooters and horrible free throw shooting, this is the highest scoring Bills team in 25 years.  This team and coach has done a remarkable job of playing to its strengths.

[glazedandconfused]

 

10 hours ago, slufanskip said:

I'm not ignoring anything. You're calling something a fact that isn't. We rank 327th of all D1 teams in 3 pointers attempted ,  328th in 3 pointers made and 159th in 3 pt % . Our oponents have shot 152 more 3's than we have. Those my friend are facts. If it's a fact that 327th is a ton of shots what word would be a fact for 227th? 

You seem to think if you just run a set it will happen. I mean hell, just practice it and do it. How the f..k hard can it be? Sorry but it just doesn't work that way. If it did we'd score a lot more than we do. Do you not think our coaching staff doesn't know that the 3 point shot is generally more efficient than the mid range shot? 

I appreciate your insight skip. I should’ve clarified. I meant of the catch and shoot attempts we take, a ton of those are open looks. (about 50% before the vcu game). My only counterpoint to yours is that almost every other team is able to find looks from 3 with more regularity than us. Defenses aren’t only trying to stop us from shooting 3s and letting everyone else chuck them at will. So why can most other teams work that into their offense but we can’t?

[slufanskip]

53 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

“Highest scoring bills team in 25 years” does not mean best offense.  I’m sure you are aware of this but needed to be pointed out. Pace of play.

 

My counterpoint is that almost every other team is able to find looks from 3 with more regularity than us. Defenses aren’t only trying to stop us from shooting 3s.

So you're conceding that we don't actually get a ton of 3's?  Here's the problem with this team becoming more 3 dependent. We have 3 players that can shoot it well enough that you want them shooting a bunch. One plays 16 mpg and is 5"10" tall,  another one has one of the slowest releases I've ever seen and can't create his own, and the 3rd's three is more of a set shot so he also needs space. We literally have 3 players shooting over 33% and none of them can really create their own shot from there. You might say Tay could but if he was playing more and shooting more defenses would concentrate more on taking that away. Besides those 3 players and Jimerson we are 30/122 on the year. 

Why do fans always have to know more than the coaches who have all the info fans have plus watch the team practice every day. I'm sorry but regardless of how loudly you say it and how many analytics someone shows on what the NBA does anything more than a slight uptick in 3 point attempts is not what this team needs offensively. 

[slu72]

1 hour ago, glazedandconfused said:

 

I appreciate your insight skip. I should’ve clarified. I meant of the catch and shoot attempts we take, a ton of those are open looks. (about 50% before the vcu game). My only counterpoint to yours is that almost every other team is able to find looks from 3 with more regularity than us. Defenses aren’t only trying to stop us from shooting 3s and letting everyone else chuck them at will. So why can most other teams work that into their offense but we can’t?

My major problem with Travis is the apparent lack of any offensive system. I don't think we have the spacing we see from other teams. We don't seem to have grasped how to set screens. We rarely use the pick and roll off a screen. I guess I got spoiled by Rick's schemes that had a real flow to them. We seem to be more helter skelter in our half court sets. A couple of games ago French got the message on the double teams to fire the ball back outside. He really made some nice fairly long passes to an open man that we converted into points. Still I just don't see us as a well coached team in the half court offense. It just seems Travis is counting on our team's athleticism and creativity to find their open shots. I'm open to dissenting comments on my observations. 

[glazedandconfused]

7 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

So you're conceding that we don't actually get a ton of 3's?  Here's the problem with this team becoming more 3 dependent. We have 3 players that can shoot it well enough that you want them shooting a bunch. One plays 16 mpg and is 5"10" tall,  another one has one of the slowest releases I've ever seen and can't create his own, and the 3rd's three is more of a set shot so he also needs space. We literally have 3 players shooting over 33% and none of them can really create their own shot from there. You might say Tay could but if he was playing more and shooting more defenses would concentrate more on taking that away. Besides those 3 players and Jimerson we are 30/122 on the year. 

Why do fans always have to know more than the coaches who have all the info fans have plus watch the team practice every day. I'm sorry but regardless of how loudly you say it and how many analytics someone shows on what the NBA does anything more than a slight uptick in 3 point attempts is not what this team needs offensively. 

thank you for agreeing an uptick in 3 Point attempts is what we need. I dont think we need to chuck up 10 more a game or anything...that’s just not realistic. Maybe 2 or 3 on average more a game would be great!

[slufanskip]

1 hour ago, glazedandconfused said:

 

I appreciate your insight skip. I should’ve clarified. I meant of the catch and shoot attempts we take, a ton of those are open looks. (about 50% before the vcu game). My only counterpoint to yours is that almost every other team is able to find looks from 3 with more regularity than us. Defenses aren’t only trying to stop us from shooting 3s and letting everyone else chuck them at will. So why can most other teams work that into their offense but we can’t?

It's our personnel. We can basically only shoot catch and shoot 3's other most other teams have people that can create. One of the reasons we get the open looks from catch and shoot is because we are more balanced scoring and teams can't just take it away.  The more that changes the more teams concentrate on taking it away. Plus your game minutes from your three 3 point shooters is  26, 24, 16. We can probably call Perkins 30 going forward so 70 min a game. We average less than 2 players on the floor at a time that can shoot. Next year with Jimerson back I think you'll see more of what you want. .

[glazedandconfused]

4 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

It's our personnel. We can basically only shoot catch and shoot 3's other most other teams have people that can create. One of the reasons we get the open looks from catch and shoot is because we are more balanced scoring and teams can't just take it away.  The more that changes the more teams concentrate on taking it away. Plus your game minutes from your three 3 point shooters is  26, 24, 16. We can probably call Perkins 30 going forward so 70 min a game. We average less than 2 players on the floor at a time that can shoot. Next year with Jimerson back I think you'll see more of what you want. .

That’s fair point and well made. Personally i hope we get more perkins and jacobs/weaver lineups. I think it’s important to have 2 of those guys on the court at MOST (not all) times during the game. I do hope next year we see that and have confidence we will. Good discussion and thanks for the discourse.

[slufanskip]

2 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

thank you for agreeing an uptick in 3 Point attempts is what we need.

I guess you just read what you wanted to hear lol. I can't say we won't see slightly more 3's going forward. I wrote that because if during the last 3 games we shoot even the smallest increase of 3's, someone (possibly you) will come back and say "see we did need to shoot more 3's"  

[glazedandconfused]

11 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

I guess you just read what you wanted to hear lol. I can't say we won't see slightly more 3's going forward. I wrote that because if during the last 3 games we shoot even the smallest increase of 3's, someone (possibly you) will come back and say "see we did need to shoot more 3's"  

Haha yea that was me just pulling out what i wanted to hear. And yea if we go 8-17 tonight i understand that’s a small sample size and that doesn’t really prove my point. Show me over the course of atleast 8-10 games and you have some data.

[slufanskip]

11 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

Haha yea that was me just pulling out what i wanted to hear. And yea if we go 8-17 tonight i understand that’s a small sample size and that doesn’t really prove my point. Show me over the course of atleast 8-10 games and you have some data.

Here's the thing imo. You have to trust the coaches aren't clueless and know more than we do. We watch 30 +/- games a year. The coaches see them 5 times that amount and all have more basketball expertise than we do. That doesn't mean mistakes aren't made but in general they know and see far more than we do. I'll use myself as an example. I see Perkins shooting horribly in 10-12 games and want him to shoot less. If you just make decisions based upon the little you see in games, I was right. However, in reality I was wrong. Perkins needed to keep shooting, it's the only way he was going to adjust to D1 and find his groove quickly, He's a natural scorer from all levels, the coaches knew this and despite some poor game results didn't push him to change. Had we done what I wanted done, I don't believe Perkins is scoring like he is now and we are a lesser team for it. Coaches right. Skip wrong

[glazedandconfused]

24 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

Here's the thing imo. You have to trust the coaches aren't clueless and know more than we do. We watch 30 +/- games a year. The coaches see them 5 times that amount and all have more basketball expertise than we do. That doesn't mean mistakes aren't made but in general they know and see far more than we do. I'll use myself as an example. I see Perkins shooting horribly in 10-12 games and want him to shoot less. If you just make decisions based upon the little you see in games, I was right. However, in reality I was wrong. Perkins needed to keep shooting, it's the only way he was going to adjust to D1 and find his groove quickly, He's a natural scorer from all levels, the coaches knew this and despite some poor game results didn't push him to change. Had we done what I wanted done, I don't believe Perkins is scoring like he is now and we are a lesser team for it. Coaches right. Skip wrong

 Do you have one example of a time this year it is fair to criticize Ford?