Basketball Expectations

[CajunEXPRESS]

Mike what makes you believe he’s the listed height while you’re claiming Russel is’t the 6’2”advertised.

I guess I’m saying we cannot believe anything put out by the administration.

[ManAboutTown]

Wow, the statement of facts are incredible. on paper, it does not look like like we will be as deep, but that's not a given. depth is about how many players you have that can give you good consistent, efficient and productive minutes.

we are losing 3 of those players. we are adding a juco CG, and freshman PG that i heard the staff expect to be those things, 1 more player steps up that did not have a big role last year, and the deep is equal. personally. i didnt think hardy played enough minutes to be added to the team depth equation last year, so with added minutes this year he could be another player counted to add depth for this year.

again, on paper we may not look as good as last year. but every returning player should and is working to be better than they were last year. with 7 returning players or 58% of the roster, each players has the ability to determine how much growth they achieve from year to year. with over half your roster improving you have a chance to be better than the year before, especially if key players make big improvement leaps. add the new comers to that and i'm not completely sold the team CANT BE better this year. let me put it like this. lasts years team can never get any better than it was. but this years team, made up of over half of last years team still has the ability to get better each day.

Oh c’mon BV.

[Cajunsmike]

Mike what makes you believe he's the listed height while you're claiming Russel is't the 6'2"advertised.

I guess I'm saying we cannot believe anything put out by the administration.

All programs exaggerate heights. I stood next to Russell at events last year and no way he is 6' 2". It is possible that Hayes is not 6'3". However his JUCO stats indicate he can get to the rim which Russell did not do much last year. He needs to improve on that in his sophomore year. Russell did move off the 3 point line and sink a couple of mid range jumpers in the NIT game. I think he could be very effective if he did that more often. I wish staff would consider more of the mid range game in their arsenal. They do believe in NBA analytics indicating the mid range is the least optimum shot. That fails to account for one thing, the defense. If they protect the rim and run you off the three point line, the mid range jumper is an effective weapon. You just need to practice it for it to be a weapon. Russell could be the ideal guy to do that. Sorry to get off topic regarding player sizes but my belief that teams going away from the mid range game when the 3 is defended is something I believe hurts basketball.

[CajunEXPRESS]

I'm with the analytical beliefs that mid range shots simply aren't worth the risk unless you are really bad at 3 point line. That's why we need people who hit way over 50% around the rim like Washington did most nights.

[Cajunsmike]

I'm with the analytical beliefs that mid range shots simply aren't worth the risk unless you are really bad at 3 point line. That's why we need people who hit way over 50% around the rim like Washington did most nights.

I used to be as well until I realized that defenses have adjusted to everything being a 3 or a shot at the rim. A guy like Russell will get run off of the three point line and may not be able to finish at the rim. If he practices the mid range shot off the dribble he will have plenty of open looks. Not everyone can do that but it can be an effective weapon with the right player. Reason analytics show the mid range shot to be less effective is because so few players practice it. If people practiced the 15 to 18 footer, they would improve and really give the defense fits. Make a few of those and you may get the open three.

[zephyr]

Wow, the statement of facts are incredible. on paper, it does not look like like we will be as deep, but that's not a given. depth is about how many players you have that can give you good consistent, efficient and productive minutes.

we are losing 3 of those players. we are adding a juco CG, and freshman PG that i heard the staff expect to be those things, 1 more player steps up that did not have a big role last year, and the deep is equal. personally. i didnt think hardy played enough minutes to be added to the team depth equation last year, so with added minutes this year he could be another player counted to add depth for this year.

again, on paper we may not look as good as last year. but every returning player should and is working to be better than they were last year. with 7 returning players or 58% of the roster, each players has the ability to determine how much growth they achieve from year to year. with over half your roster improving you have a chance to be better than the year before, especially if key players make big improvement leaps. add the new comers to that and i'm not completely sold the team CANT BE better this year. let me put it like this. lasts years team can never get any better than it was. but this years team, made up of over half of last years team still has the ability to get better each day.

Every player returning is not a Bryce Washington, J Stove or Bartley. I'm sure there will be some improvement but the question is will there be leadership come from and the same level of productivity?

[zephyr]

I used to be as well until I realized that defenses have adjusted to everything being a 3 or a shot at the rim. A guy like Russell will get run off of the three point line and may not be able to finish at the rim. If he practices the mid range shot off the dribble he will have plenty of open looks. Not everyone can do that but it can be an effective weapon with the right player. Reason analytics show the mid range shot to be less effective is because so few players practice it. If people practiced the 15 to 18 footer, they would improve and really give the defense fits. Make a few of those and you may get the open three.

A good shot is the best shot. Period. I've seen guys get an offensive rebound and be wide open 7 feet from the rim but instead they kick the ball out to a guy who takes a contested, double pump 3 pointer because its the preferred shot. There is no way you could explain or prove that the 3 point shot was the better shot over the open shot in the lane. Players typically shoot much higher percentages when they are not being contested. I'll take that over the slight advantage of hitting a couple extra 3 pointers.

[Cajunsmike]

A good shot is the best shot. Period. I've seen guys get an offensive rebound and be wide open 7 feet from the rim but instead they kick the ball out to a guy who takes a contested, double pump 3 pointer because its the preferred shot. There is no way you could explain or prove that the 3 point shot was the better shot over the open shot in the lane. Players typically shoot much higher percentages when they are not being contested. I'll take that over the slight advantage of hitting a couple extra 3 pointers.

+1

[CajunEXPRESS]

A good shot is the best shot. Period. I've seen guys get an offensive rebound and be wide open 7 feet from the rim but instead they kick the ball out to a guy who takes a contested, double pump 3 pointer because its the preferred shot. There is no way you could explain or prove that the 3 point shot was the better shot over the open shot in the lane. Players typically shoot much higher percentages when they are not being contested. I'll take that over the slight advantage of hitting a couple extra 3 pointers.

Those open mid range shots rarely exceed 45%, most people who cannot hit 30% from 3 point range don't shoot them. So you've got to hit 15 more jump shots mid range to equal 30% in a hundred shots. Not a good risk, but go ahead let y'all bias find exceptions. We're talking the typical player.

Apparently coaches whose living depends on making the right decisions don’t understand.

[Cajunsmike]

Those open mid range shots rarely exceed 45%, most people who cannot hit 30% from 3 point range don't shoot them. So you've got to hit 15 more jump shots mid range to equal 30% in a hundred shots. Not a good risk, but go ahead let y'all bias find exceptions. We're talking the typical player.

Apparently coaches whose living depends on making the right decisions don’t understand.

Our staff is completely bought into favoring the three or shots at the rim over mid range shots. Here is an instance where you agree with them and I don't fully. I just prefer open mid range shots over contested threes if the right player is shooting the open mid range shot. Key phrase is "contested three". If both shots are open, you are correct in that the three is a better gamble. I have no problem with open threes. What some are missing is that defenses are beginning to adjust to the new game and contest a lot more threes than they used to. That allows more open shots away from the three point line.