Cal should recruit players than can shoot

[arenk]

Elite athletes are great, but I'd prefer ones that can shoot the ball. Granted, it looks as though next year's class has outstanding shooters. It may be that the speed of the game and having to exert so much energy on defense hampers these kids' shooting once they arrive at UK. I just find myself amazed at how poorly our shooting has been at times, especially with kids who were suppose to be good or great shooters. Even Booker was streaky last year. Delk, Lamb and Mills have been exceptions and while you can win with elite athletes just as we did in 2012, it helps to have elite athletes who are also good shooters. In 2012 we at least had Miller and Lamb to break down zones. Thus far Ulis and Murray have been less than stellar from outside and they will have to be if we are to make a serious run in March.

 

[Wildcat-in-STL]

So in other words our team should look like Indiana?

 

[musrat59]

It would be nice to have shooters like Lamb and Booker.

 

[Clive Gollings]

If only we were perfect and won every game by 20. Oh wait, that was last year and some fans still complained right up to the Final Four.

 

[BBUK]

I was listening to the radio on the way in and there is a great shooter available;

 

[whhs22]

to be honest there just are not that many great pure shooters anymore. and the ones that are available you usually have to give up something when you have them on the floor.

loved Kyle , but you gave up a lot of D while he was on the floor. even a guy like Alford. the kid can shot lights out when hot. but if he was at UK are you playing him in front of Briscoe or Ulis?

Booker was not expected to be that lights out shooter he has become. he was good , but he was expected to be more of the traditional 2 , not a 50% knock down shooter. if I remember correctly think most thought Blackmon was going to be a better shooter.

for the most part you find 2s these days who have an all around game. not like in the 80s and 90s were you had 2s that strictly shoot then you hide them on D.

just do not think in this day and time you'll find that pure shooter that can stay on the floor long enough to contribute more then they would give up.

 

[TNCatfanforever]

to be honest there just are not that many great pure shooters anymore. and the ones that are available you usually have to give up something when you have them on the floor.

loved Kyle , but you gave up a lot of D while he was on the floor. even a guy like Alford. the kid can shot lights out when hot. but if he was at UK are you playing him in front of Briscoe or Ulis?

Booker was not expected to be that lights out shooter he has become. he was good , but he was expected to be more of the traditional 2 , not a 50% knock down shooter. if I remember correctly think most thought Blackmon was going to be a better shooter.

for the most part you find 2s these days who have an all around game. not like in the 80s and 90s were you had 2s that strictly shoot then you hide them on D.

just do not think in this day and time you'll find that pure shooter that can stay on the floor long enough to contribute more then they would give up.

Most great shooting guards are slow white guys who can't run, jump or dunk so they stand around all day and shoot. Every now and then you find one who is an athlete like Chapman or Grayson Allen, etc.....the rest go to mid majors like Murray, Belmont, Morehead, Indiana and so forth.

 

[anon_q409idbs5m40a]

OP is right. A team has to make shots to go deep into the tournament. The lack of outside shooting is a huge concern for this team as well as free throw shooting.

 

[BBUK]

Yeah darn that 69% free throw shooting last game as a team..geez they gotta be near 95 to 100% or they are a bust.

 

[downthehatch]

What would you consider good enough? How many do we need? And what percentage of 3 pt. shots would you want them to have hit during their senior year of HS? Or juco?

 

[TruBluCatFan]

Whiners gonna whine.

 

[Blueaz]

wasn't Murray shooting lights out at the pan am games?
Isn't our FT% pretty good, if you take out Lee?
Sometimes our fans just suck

 

[marshalfan]

to be honest there just are not that many great pure shooters anymore. and the ones that are available you usually have to give up something when you have them on the floor.

loved Kyle , but you gave up a lot of D while he was on the floor. even a guy like Alford. the kid can shot lights out when hot. but if he was at UK are you playing him in front of Briscoe or Ulis?

Booker was not expected to be that lights out shooter he has become. he was good , but he was expected to be more of the traditional 2 , not a 50% knock down shooter. if I remember correctly think most thought Blackmon was going to be a better shooter.

for the most part you find 2s these days who have an all around game. not like in the 80s and 90s were you had 2s that strictly shoot then you hide them on D.

just do not think in this day and time you'll find that pure shooter that can stay on the floor long enough to contribute more then they would give up.

Booker was considered one the best shooters in his class. Lamb was a great shooter. Ulis was considered a great shooter and will shoot better than 38% the rest of the season.

 

[Primedfor9]

Ulis and Murray were considered good shooters, Kennard and Newman were considered two of the best and cal recruited them, though they're not shooting it well so far. Who should we recruit op? You don't like going to final fours and title games?

 

[UKWildcats#8]

Ulis and Murray were considered good shooters, Kennard and Newman were considered two of the best and cal recruited them, though they're not shooting it well so far. Who should we recruit op? You don't like going to final fours and title games?

No, the OP does not like going to final fours and title games. Back to the Tubby and Coach G years. We had Meeks in 2009...lost 13-14 games or something. He burned the nets though.

 

[UKCatnNC]

There appears to be some shooters in the 2016 class. Go Cats!!

 

[anon_q409idbs5m40a]

Yeah darn that 69% free throw shooting last game as a team..geez they gotta be near 95 to 100% or they are a bust.

69% is really not very good for FT shooting. Look back at some of the great UK teams in the past and you'll see that most hit close to 80%.

 

[anon_q409idbs5m40a]

No, the OP does not like going to final fours and title games. Back to the Tubby and Coach G years. We had Meeks in 2009...lost 13-14 games or something. He burned the nets though.

Meeks was only one player. Still have to have several guys that can score.

 

[Wildcat-in-STL]

Um we've got those guys, Ulis , Murray , Willis and Mulder. Why aren't they shooting well?

So do we need to get the people who taught them how to shoot the ball well hotels in lexington to constantly work with them to be consistent or what? I mean Willis' high school coach noticed the flaw in his form and worked with him a bit and thats when Willis was lighting it up..... I thought the staff was supposed to be able to spot things like that.

But unfortunately no one on our staff is known for shooting or coaching shooting. Doesnt really instill confidence in that area does it?

 

[rolaid]

We have 2 guys bringing free throw % down...Lee & Briscoe. Ulis gets wide open threes and I think he will start hitting soon

 

[Catapult]

69% is really not very good for FT shooting. Look back at some of the great UK teams in the past and you'll see that most hit close to 80%.

Care to name some of those? I can't remember any team shooting 80% or even that close (unless you are counting within 10 percentage points as close!). Low 70's is considered excellent for any team.

 

[Wildcat-in-STL]

69% is really not very good for FT shooting. Look back at some of the great UK teams in the past and you'll see that most hit close to 80%.

Our 1996 title team shot 71% from FT's
Our 2012 team shot 72%
Last year shot 72%

We've played 10 games...... we are shooting 180 FT's out of 265 ... so 190 out of 265 is 72% Meaning if we had hit just 1 of the FT's for each game, we are 72%

Briscoe and Matthews are shooting horribly and they are high school 70% FT shooters so eventually their averages will come up.... Lee is a lost cause but we should focus on how well the rest of the team is shooting the FT's.

 

[Wildcat-in-STL]

I went to John Scott's site and did the math myself. Not one single UK team shot 80% FT's since 1970. Thats 45 years and not one single 80% or higher. 1 team shot 77% and 2 or 3 shot 75% but most shot 72% and less.

 

[kybassfan]

Ok, who's turn was it to watch the asylum?

 

[CatFanInTheBathtub]

Op is right. He also needs to zone more, yell less, play Willis more, and to be honest I'm not real excited about the amount of gel he is putting in his these days. Furthermore I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to find out that he habitually smokes marijuana cigarettes.

 

[blubo]

69% is really not very good for FT shooting. Look back at some of the great UK teams in the past and you'll see that most hit close to 80%.

actually at this point of the season--ten games in-- this is cal's best free throw shooting team. 3-point shooting---his worst. per ksr. i think both will improve, especially the 3 point shooting.

 

[Mike-D]

Our 1996 title team shot 71% from FT's
Our 2012 team shot 72%
Last year shot 72%

We've played 10 games...... we are shooting 180 FT's out of 265 ... so 190 out of 265 is 72% Meaning if we had hit just 1 of the FT's for each game, we are 72%

Briscoe and Matthews are shooting horribly and they are high school 70% FT shooters so eventually their averages will come up.... Lee is a lost cause but we should focus on how well the rest of the team is shooting the FT's.

Thanks for doing the homework. I knew what he posted was bogus as hell. 80% as a team.

 

[CUT-NETS]

wasn't Murray shooting lights out at the pan am games?
Isn't our FT% pretty good, if you take out Lee?
Sometimes our fans just suck

He was lights out in the Pan Am games, and every other game that was televised. Gets to UK and boom, can't shoot anymore.

 

[Primedfor9]

I went to John Scott's site and did the math myself. Not one single UK team shot 80% FT's since 1970. Thats 45 years and not one single 80% or higher. 1 team shot 77% and 2 or 3 shot 75% but most shot 72% and less.

I wonder if he and Cut-Nets who liked the post will acknowledge the facts? I doubt it. Facts ruin everything.

 

[NCukcat62]

I mean shooters are good to have but I like going to final fours nearly every year. Also op, we already have some pretty good shooters, willis, Murray, and ulis.

 

[wcc31]

Elite athletes are great, but I'd prefer ones that can shoot the ball.

That's the same formula that got Duke bounced the Sweet 16 or before 8/10 years heading into last year.

Yes, you need shooters, but in today's game the ability to get to the rim, stop dribble penetration and protect the rim is even more important.

I get the criticism, and I'd love to add another shooter or two to this year's squad, but quickness and athleticism are even more important in today's game.

 

[CELTICAT]

No one is forcing anybody to be a UK basketball fan. If you like how Vandy or Belmont or Duke plays basketball, by all means follow them and shut the hell up.

 

[wcc31]

69% is really not very good for FT shooting. Look back at some of the great UK teams in the past and you'll see that most hit close to 80%.

In the last 35 years, no great UK teams have shot close to 80%. In fact, here are some great UK teams I chose and all are comparable to this team:

'93- 68%
'96- 71%
'98- 67%
'03- 70%
'12- 72%

 

[DCFseattle]

So like Brandon Knight and Doron Lamb and Aaron Harrison and Devin Booker and Tyler Ulis, and Jamal Murray?

i bet if he woulda recruited those guys, we'd be awesome.

 

[wcc31]

I went to John Scott's site and did the math myself. Not one single UK team shot 80% FT's since 1970. Thats 45 years and not one single 80% or higher. 1 team shot 77% and 2 or 3 shot 75% but most shot 72% and less.

He must be thinking of some of Hall and Rupp's teams. The '78 squad shot at 77% which is ridiculous.

 

[CUT-NETS]

So like Brandon Knight and Doron Lamb and Aaron Harrison and Devin Booker and Tyler Ulis, and Jamal Murray?

i bet if he woulda recruited those guys, we'd be awesome.

Ulis and Murray are good shooters I agree. Just not this year.

 

[BBUK]

69% is really not very good for FT shooting. Look back at some of the great UK teams in the past and you'll see that most hit close to 80%.

Keep hating...you'll be great! Oh, and you are a hater. You and the one that likes you.

 

[BBUK]

69% is really not very good for FT shooting. Look back at some of the great UK teams in the past and you'll see that most hit close to 80%.

Don't you feel just a little bit stupid now? If you don't, you should. (I didn't read the posts below your reply to me.)

 

[JonathanW]

Due to many reasons, kids don't practice shooting as much as they used to. So there are less of them available.

But just looking at the past 16 seasons (7 Cal, 9 pre-Cal) at UK, our top 3 pt shooters (by season) have been (in order):
Lamb (Cal)
Lamb
Miller (not Cal recruit)
Wiltjer (Cal)
Ulis (Cal)
Fitch (not Cal)
Booker (Cal)
Fitch
Meeks (not Cal)
Fitch
These are the 10 seasons of 40%+ shooting from 3 since the 2000-2001 season, with a minimum of 2 attempts per game.
Cal's team accounted for 44% of those teams. But the first couple had players he did not recruit, his recruits are probably about 35-40% of the players over that period.
Yet Cal's players accounted for 50% of the seasons of >40% 3pt shooting, and 57% of the players who had a season of 40%+ shooting.

Also during that same timeframe, Cal's teams shot 47.2% compared to 47.0% by the non-Cal teams; Cal's teams shot 34.5% from 3, compared to 34.9% from non-Cal teams; and Cal's teams shot 69.0% from the FT line, compared to 69.9% by non-Cal teams.

Conclusions: Cal's teams as a group have shot similar (but maybe very slightly worse) than his predecessor teams as a group. But he has actually done a better job at finding a few good shooters for each team than his predecessor teams did.



As an aside, this exercise reminds me how good, but under-appreciated Fitch was. Three of his 4 seasons he shot 40%+ from 3, and shot 39.6% across all 4 seasons. He also averaged 1.2 steals, and 4.0 rebounds per game across 4 years.

 

[Smashcat]

Elite athletes are great, but I'd prefer ones that can shoot the ball.

Cal recruits plenty of shooters. Doesn't get them all. The two absolute best shooters in the class of 2017, Trent Jr. and Trae Young, got early offers and both were at MM. Happy now?