Cal's edict to "SHOOT THE BALL!".....

[catrecruit]

Paid off....Cal's green light took the pressure off guys and they made shots

11 three's on 48% is proof that it made them more relaxed and we see the results....WTG Cal!

 

[BostonCat2001]

need more shooting, less driving/post ups. i'd even figure out a way to get mulder more time over guys like briscoe/mathrews.

 

[KentuckyRLD]

need more shooting, less driving/post ups. i'd even figure out a way to get mulder more time over guys like briscoe/mathrews.

Mulder may well have his place in certain situations, however, he is a MAJOR defensive liability. He certainly is not as good offensively as Stewart and to even think he is in Briscoe's class on either offense or defense is a real joke.

 

[UKCatsFan10]

I was getting frustrated watching Ulis and Murray (mainly Murray) pass up open shots in a stretch of games there for a while. I know our percentage wasn't good and the media story was that the Cats can't shoot, but anyone that had actually watched these guys knew that wasn't true. Murray is one of the best shooters in the country coming off screens or creating shots with off-ball movement. Ulis obviously can shoot, as indicated by being a 40+% 3-point shooter last season. Finally against UL they seemed to shoot freely and suddenly the shots started falling.

 

[BostonCat2001]

Mulder may well have his place in certain situations, however, he is a MAJOR defensive liability. He certainly is not as good offensively as Stewart and to even think he is in Briscoe's class on either offense or defense is a real joke.

we are never going to be an elite defensive team. so why try? just be adequate. work to be a great offensive team. pieces are there for that. briscoe is great at driving the ball, but with him on the court, it clogs the lane because teams know he cant shoot. it hurts post ups, it hurts offensive rebounding and at some point, it will be harder for him to drive making him less effective.

 

[BBUK]

we are never going to be an elite defensive team. so why try? just be adequate. work to be a great offensive team. pieces are there for that. briscoe is great at driving the ball, but with him on the court, it clogs the lane because teams know he cant shoot. it hurts post ups, it hurts offensive rebounding and at some point, it will be harder for him to drive making him less effective.

Briscoe does more than what you state. I dare say UofL would not have been nearly as close this last game had Briscoe played. He just does more than what you state. If Rick thought his guys were getting hammered as he claimed at half time....he'd have hated Briscoe.

 

[BostonCat2001]

Briscoe does more than what you state. I dare say UofL would not have been nearly as close this last game had Briscoe played. He just does more than what you state. If Rick thought his guys were getting hammered as he claimed at half time....he'd have hated Briscoe.

you are right..i missed he stinks at FTs. seriously....why dont other teams just follow him all the time? its the equivalent of a missed shot.

 

[BBUK]

you are right..i missed he stinks at FTs. seriously....why dont other teams just follow him all the time? its the equivalent of a missed shot.

That's a bad take BC2001. Briscoe shows up to play. I think he is playing faster than he has ever played before and his game has not caught up yet. I think it will, if you don't, I understand but don't agree. Be Good

 

[UKBrassowTipIN]

we are never going to be an elite defensive team. so why try? just be adequate. work to be a great offensive team. pieces are there for that. briscoe is great at driving the ball, but with him on the court, it clogs the lane because teams know he cant shoot. it hurts post ups, it hurts offensive rebounding and at some point, it will be harder for him to drive making him less effective.

What makes you think they can't be great defensively...this is a pressing team that we haven't always had. People never realize defense is always Cal's main focus. Briscoe, ulis, murray, hawkins, matthews, lee, and especially poythress are more than proficient defenders. This just isnt block shot defense team. But they can turn and trap teams and press...which they did uofl. We haven't had many full court press teams.

 

[The_Answer1313]

You could make the argument that with Briscoe playing we lose this game.

54%/24%/38%..........that's horrible. Briscoe's strength is his ability to drive but if you can't make free throws it's just not going to work out.

We could also talk about his 21% turnover rate. UL forces a ton of turnovers. At the beginning of the game the announcers made it sound like Briscoe would be a huge loss because you'd want another guard against the press, but with him out of the lineup other guys saw more of the ball. Those guys didn't commit turnovers like Briscoe does.

We can also talk positives tho. UL had 21 offensive rebounds. We got murdered on the glass. It's the only reason this game was as close as it was. Briscoe is 3rd on this team in defensive rebounding % only behind Alex and Lee. He is better than Murray, better than Ulis and sadly better than Skal. So having him in there would have helped out in the regard at least.

 

[The_Answer1313]

I'm sorta meh on the game overall TBH. We won and that's the most important thing but it was kinda live by the 3 die by the 3. There was a huge amount of big shots.........some from players I'm not sure could really replicate that on a consistent basis.

We are not a bad shooting team like the majority of the first 11 games or so. But we are also probably not going to hit 11 threes night in night out either.

 

[caneintally]

we are never going to be an elite defensive team. so why try? just be adequate. work to be a great offensive team. pieces are there for that. briscoe is great at driving the ball, but with him on the court, it clogs the lane because teams know he cant shoot. it hurts post ups, it hurts offensive rebounding and at some point, it will be harder for him to drive making him less effective.

Actually that is totally off base. Our D could be stellar as Briscoe , Hawkins , Matthews , Lee , Poythress , Ulis are all good to great defenders. Our 2 strengths should be shooting and D. Our biggest weakness is only Poythress ( and Humphries if he played ) can create offense in the post.

 

[BostonCat2001]

I'm sorta meh on the game overall TBH. We won and that's the most important thing but it was kinda live by the 3 die by the 3. There was a huge amount of big shots.........some from players I'm not sure could really replicate that on a consistent basis.

We are not a bad shooting team like the majority of the first 11 games or so. But we are also probably not going to hit 11 threes night in night out either.

11 threes is a special night. but with the right line up out there, playing a certain type of offense, having the right guys shoot it in, getting the ball in spots to shoot it with a good look...this team should be looking to get 6-8 per game. and between ulis, murray, willis, and mulder....its doable.

and you are right about briscoe. his defense and toughness is great...but he plays instead of hawkins. briscoe isnt getting those threes when we needed them. a lot of times...its not so much the shot that goes but when it does.

 

[dlh331]

We need to morph into Cal's Bombinos...launch 22-25 threes a game

Our last 5 halves of basketball we are 25 for 52 from 3 for 48.1%. That will do nicely

Darryl

 

[UKWildcats#8]

I said the same thing immediately after. Don't think UK wins that game with Briscoe's shooting.

I agree. That said, Hawkins was just as terrible a shooter coming into the game yesterday for his career from 3 (and 2 point shots even!) so maybe Briscoe would have caught the magical 3 point shooting touch...although I still doubt it.

 

[BostonCat2001]

I agree. That said, Hawkins was just as terrible a shooter coming into the game yesterday for his career from 3 (and 2 point shots even!) so maybe Briscoe would have caught the magical 3 point shooting touch...although I still doubt it.

yeah but briscoe shooting form puts a shiver down my spine.

 

[Aike]

With Briscoe playing, I think that game is played in the 60s instead of the 70s. We probably still win, the game just looks different.

As far as defense, I see no reason why we can't be terrific on that end.

I think the model is more what Duke did last year. By the end of the year, they were one of the best defensive teams in the country. They pressured the ball and got out on the break.

Cal will have to fully embrace the dark side to get the most out of this team. It's risky, and he hates risk, but the alternative is a team that is just so-so at everything. As a scrappy, pressure, 3 point shooting team, we can make some noise.

 

[The_Answer1313]

I'm not sure I'm for the bombs away from 3. 3 point shooting is much less consistent and when you looking to win 6 games in a row in March I'm not sure that's the right course of action.

2015 - While Duke was a great 3 point shooting team, they didn't take many. I tend to think of teams like Villanova and that team never really does much in March.

3PT/FGA Rank

2015 - Duke (198th)
2014 - Uconn (140th)
2013 - Louisville (263rd)
2012 - UK (313th)
2011 - Uconn (257th)
2010 - Duke (154th)
2009 - UNC (300th)
2008 - Kansas (287th)
2007 - Florida (166th)
2006 - Florida (126th)
2005 - North Carolina (230th)
2004 - Uconn (301st)
2003 - Syracuse (293rd)
2002 - Maryland (290th)

Teams that ultimately win titles just don't rely a whole lot on the 3 ball. There's too much game to game fluctuation. That's great if your Garner Webb and want to pull of an upset but if you have the talent advantage, you want to stick to mostly twos.

 

[EnglandWildcat]

11 threes is a special night. but with the right line up out there, playing a certain type of offense, having the right guys shoot it in, getting the ball in spots to shoot it with a good look...this team should be looking to get 6-8 per game. and between ulis, murray, willis, and mulder....its doable.

and you are right about briscoe. his defense and toughness is great...but he plays instead of hawkins. briscoe isnt getting those threes when we needed them. a lot of times...its not so much the shot that goes but when it does.

But maybe we don't 'need' those threes if Briscoe is playing. He is our best defender and would have been on Lee. Lee is very good and Briscoe wouldn't have stopped him, but he may have slowed him down. And Briscoe can get to the rim and finish. The point differential may not have been that different.

People act like everything else is a constant... except Briscoe being a poor shooter. He would have helped in other areas.

 

[The_Answer1313]

But maybe we don't 'need' those threes if Briscoe is playing. He is our best defender and would have been on Lee. Lee is very good and Briscoe wouldn't have stopped him, but he may have slowed him down. And Briscoe can get to the rim and finish. The point differential may not have been that different.

People act like everything else is a constant... except Briscoe being a poor shooter. He would have helped in other areas.

Of course. I mean UL rebounded 52.5% of their missed shots. Briscoe is actually one of our better rebounders. So maybe the shooting goes down but our rebounding numbers improve with him on the court.

That being said, shooting is the most important stat. It's not just Briscoe either tho. With him on the floor, likely means no Hawkins and he hit some big shots for us.

 

[LmdCat]

Mulder may well have his place in certain situations, however, he is a MAJOR defensive liability. He certainly is not as good offensively as Stewart and to even think he is in Briscoe's class on either offense or defense is a real joke.

When the team is struggling to score points, it might be a good idea to devise a defense that will allow some of your better shooters on the floor. I find it hard to believe that Mulder's defense is any worse than Murray's.

 

[Aike]

I'm not sure I'm for the bombs away from 3. 3 point shooting is much less consistent and when you looking to win 6 games in a row in March I'm not sure that's the right course of action.

2015 - While Duke was a great 3 point shooting team, they didn't take many. I tend to think of teams like Villanova and that team never really does much in March.

3PT/FGA Rank

2015 - Duke (198th)
2014 - Uconn (140th)
2013 - Louisville (263rd)
2012 - UK (313th)
2011 - Uconn (257th)
2010 - Duke (154th)
2009 - UNC (300th)
2008 - Kansas (287th)
2007 - Florida (166th)
2006 - Florida (126th)
2005 - North Carolina (230th)
2004 - Uconn (301st)
2003 - Syracuse (293rd)
2002 - Maryland (290th)

Teams that ultimately win titles just don't rely a whole lot on the 3 ball. There's too much game to game fluctuation. That's great if your Garner Webb and want to pull of an upset but if you have the talent advantage, you want to stick to mostly twos.

What you say is true, and clearly Cal has always coached with this in mind.

Couple of points...

1. You have to play the hand you're dealt. We will continue to try to develop a post presence, but barring significant changes, that won't be our identity.

2. Being effective from three is not the same as bombs away. We have to play loose and make teams pay for leaving us wide open. Still have to take quality shots.

I would say that 3 point defense is more important than 3 point offense to prevent a tourney upset, but this particular team is going to have to be effective from the perimeter to be at it's best. And yes, there is more risk involved. I just don't think we have much choice with our available personnel.

 

[The_Answer1313]

What you say is true, and clearly Cal has always coached with this in mind.

Couple of points...

1. You have to play the hand you're dealt. We will continue to try to develop a post presence, but barring significant changes, that won't be our identity.

2. Being effective from three is not the same as bombs away. We have to play loose and make teams pay for leaving us wide open. Still have to take quality shots.

I would say that 3 point defense is more important than 3 point offense to prevent a tourney upset, but this particular team is going to have to be effective from the perimeter to be at it's best. And yes, there is more risk involved. I just don't think we have much choice with our available personnel.

I think that's part of the issue. I'm not sure this team really has an identity at all. Skal has been a disappointment and as such we don't have that post presence. Then again outside of Ulis and Murray I don't know if we have any more guys that can be consistent from 3.

I agree with making teams pay for leaving us wide open, but how do you get wide open 3s to begin with? By having a post presence. If teams can't even respect our guys there's really no reason to let us get effective 3s to begin with.

It all ties into each other

 

[Aike]

I think that's part of the issue. I'm not sure this team really has an identity at all. Skal has been a disappointment and as such we don't have that post presence. Then again outside of Ulis and Murray I don't know if we have any more guys that can be consistent from 3.

I agree with making teams pay for leaving us wide open, but how do you get wide open 3s to begin with? By having a post presence. If teams can't even respect our guys there's really no reason to let us get effective 3s to begin with.

It all ties into each other

You also get wide open threes when the other team backs off expecting you to drive.

I think that's a shift Cal made this week - freeing up our minds to go ahead and take that shot.

It's unconventional, because you would like to see that ball go inside out. But if you're wide open AND you are a terrific shooter (Ulis, Murray, even Willis), you have to make teams pay for that level of disrespect.

Do that consistently and they don't leave you open. Then you drive by, throw lobs, and kick out.

 

[mj2k10]

I'm not sure I'm for the bombs away from 3. 3 point shooting is much less consistent and when you looking to win 6 games in a row in March I'm not sure that's the right course of action.

2015 - While Duke was a great 3 point shooting team, they didn't take many. I tend to think of teams like Villanova and that team never really does much in March.

3PT/FGA Rank

2015 - Duke (198th)
2014 - Uconn (140th)
2013 - Louisville (263rd)
2012 - UK (313th)
2011 - Uconn (257th)
2010 - Duke (154th)
2009 - UNC (300th)
2008 - Kansas (287th)
2007 - Florida (166th)
2006 - Florida (126th)
2005 - North Carolina (230th)
2004 - Uconn (301st)
2003 - Syracuse (293rd)
2002 - Maryland (290th)

Teams that ultimately win titles just don't rely a whole lot on the 3 ball. There's too much game to game fluctuation. That's great if your Garner Webb and want to pull of an upset but if you have the talent advantage, you want to stick to mostly twos.

Really surprising numbers, and an interesting contrast to the NBA, where teams that have owned the 3 point line have become increasingly dominant in the last 5 years. It makes me wonder if there's a point of diminishing returns on 3 point attempts, where taking a certain amount is more a sign of desperation and limited options, as opposed to any kind of strategy.

NBA teams this year are taking about 28% of their total shots from 3 point range- the highest number ever, and a huge increase from even 10 years ago, when it was barely over 20%. In college basketball, OTOH, because of the closer line, teams have been taking over 30% of their FG attempts from 3 point range every single year that you listed, without any significant variation in the ratio. Yet, of the last 14 National Champs, none have been in the top 1/3rd of team 3 point attempts, and 8 have been in the bottom third. You have no college equivalent of Golden State, or the Spurs from 2014, no great team that was capable of bombing an opponent out of the building on a consistent basis.

And a sidenote on that, given UK's (particularly Ulis's) 3 point shooting Saturday: Does anyone else ever wonder of college shooters would actually be better (purposely) backing off the college 3 point line by a foot or 2? I do. Overall NBA 3 point shooting % is 35%, which is better than in college basketball. I know the NBA is the best of the best, but there are A LOT of cases where guys who had mediocre or bad 3 point %'s in college suddenly get better in the NBA, from further out. I think a chunk of that is because you see so many NBA 3's where a guy has both feet set, shoulders squared, before the ball ever gets in the air. Without being tremendously rushed, because it's one step farther for a defender to get out on him than it is in college.

Which is what Ulis had Saturday, because he backed 3-5 feet away from the line.

 

[BostonCat2001]

i wouldnt spend too much time trying to find a correlation between the NBA and NCAA when it comes 3 point shooting. apples and oranges. one game is designed to be more free flowing, highlight individual skill. the other is designed to be an even playing field.

 

[Aike]

Really surprising numbers, and an interesting contrast to the NBA, where teams that have owned the 3 point line have become increasingly dominant in the last 5 years. It makes me wonder of there's a point of diminishing returns on 3 point attempts, where taking a certain amount is more a sign of desperation and limited options, as opposed to any kind of strategy.

NBA teams this year are taking about 28% of their total shots from 3 point range- the highest number ever, and a huge increase from even 10 years ago, when it was barely over 20%. In college basketball, OTOH, because of the closer line, teams have been taking over 30% of their FG attempts from 3 point range every single year that you listed, without any significant variation in the ratio. Yet, of the last 14 National Champs, none have been in the top 1/3rd of team 3 point attempts, and 8 have been in the bottom third. You have no college equivalent of Golden State, or the Spurs from 2014, no great team that was capable of bombing an opponent out of the building on a consistent basis.

And a sidenote on that, given UK's (particularly Ulis's) 3 point shooting Saturday: Does anyone else ever wonder of college shooters would actually be better (purposely) backing off the college 3 point line by a foot or 2? I do. Overall NBA 3 point shooting % is 35%, which is better than in college basketball. I know the NBA is the best of the best, but there are A LOT of cases where guys who had mediocre or bad 3 point %'s in college suddenly get better in the NBA, from further out. I think a chunk of that is because you see so many NBA 3's where a guy has both feet set, shoulders squared, before the ball ever gets in the air. Without being tremendously rushed, because it's one step farther for a defender to get out on him than it is in college.

Which is what Ulis had Saturday, because he backed 3-5 feet away from the line.

The biggest difference I see is 7 game series vs. a one shot tourney.

It's hard to beat a team like GS 4 out of 7, but anyone can win one game. Which is why the best college coaches coach a style that limits variance.

Agree on the distance of the line. Better spacing helps. What good is a shorter shot if someone is in your face?

 

[yoshukai]

When the team is struggling to score points, it might be a good idea to devise a defense that will allow some of your better shooters on the floor. I find it hard to believe that Mulder's defense is any worse than Murray's.

Actually , from the practice reports I've heard , Mulder has struggled to make shots in practice and his confidence is as low as Skals right now . Surprisingly, that is the main reason he hasn't been getting clock .

 

[BostonCat2001]

Actually , from the practice reports I've heard , Mulder has struggled to make shots in practice and his confidence is as low as Skals right now . Surprisingly, that is the main reason he hasn't been getting clock .

i would believe that if there was some point this season where mulder actually got playing time.

 

[LmdCat]

Actually , from the practice reports I've heard , Mulder has struggled to make shots in practice and his confidence is as low as Skals right now . Surprisingly, that is the main reason he hasn't been getting clock .

It is more like having their confidence taken from them. These kids are use to playing against great competition and it is too early in the season for it to have been lost based on game play.

 

[yoshukai]

It is more like having their confidence taken from them. These kids are use to playing against great competition and it is too early in the season for it to have been lost based on game play.

Skal and Mulder being the exceptions though.

 

[BigRedMachineBigBlueNation]

The coaches on here said it wa a terrible idea though... *eye roll*

 

[The_Answer1313]

NBA teams this year are taking about 28% of their total shots from 3 point range- the highest number ever, and a huge increase from even 10 years ago, when it was barely over 20%. In college basketball, OTOH, because of the closer line, teams have been taking over 30% of their FG attempts from 3 point range every single year that you listed, without any significant variation in the ratio. Yet, of the last 14 National Champs, none have been in the top 1/3rd of team 3 point attempts, and 8 have been in the bottom third. You have no college equivalent of Golden State, or the Spurs from 2014, no great team that was capable of bombing an opponent out of the building on a consistent basis.

Not only do the last 14 national champs not rank in the top third but if you go any year and look at the top teams, they are almost always from smaller conferences (with the few exceptions for your Villanova, Creighton, etc).

So teams understand this. The smaller schools realize the only chance they have of being the bigger schools is to go crazy from three. The bigger conference schools realize that 2 point shooting is much more consistent than 3 pt shooting and thus stick to it.

As far as the break even point I guess it would matter on percentage. 3 point shots count 1.5 times more than 2 point shots. So 34% from 3 is basically the same thing as 51% from 2. Right now the average 2 point FG% is 48%. So I suppose if a team can shoot 3s at greater than a 32% clip, they should take a bunch and would see an increase in their offensive efficiency.

Tho having said that, offenses don't have total control over what shot they take. Kenpom did a study and it said the offense has 71% control over it's 3PA%. So it's largely in the offense hands but defenses do have some control. All you have to do is look at our defense since Cal's been here. Even tho we had great shot blockers, even tho we had greater talent and the intuition is the only way they can win is to hit from 3, even with the excellent 2 pt FG defense overall, teams did not shoot a bunch of three's against us. We have basically chased teams off the line and forced them to drive which usually resulted in a block or altered shot.

3PA% against since Cal's been here and rank
2010 - 33.8% (225th)
2011 - 29.7% (72nd)
2012 - 29% (52nd)
2013 - 28.4% (36th)
2014 - 30.3% (84th)
2015 - 30.5% (71st)
2016 - 27.4% (9th)

With the exception of 2010, teams just didn't shoot alot of threes against us.

 

[LmdCat]

Skal and Mulder being the exceptions though.

They are no exceptions. They have played against enough highly rated competition to have been exposed before coming here if they were incapable of playing.

 

[yoshukai]

They are no exceptions. They have played against enough highly rated competition to have been exposed before coming here if they were incapable of playing.

Well one was JUCO and the other her played in and against a glorified church league so I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on those two .

 

[gracetoyou]

Agree OP! I've been preaching this since after the 1st few games as Cal pushed the team to drive the ball & not settle for jumpers. He's right for doing so, but keeping the green light no helps good shooters do their thing.

 

[BreckCo.Wildcat]

Briscoe's game looks different if Ulis and Murray start hitting 3s

Open up the lane and the bulldog will score

 

[BostonCat2001]

Briscoe's game looks different if Ulis and Murray start hitting 3s

Open up the lane and the bulldog will score

OR

you put another guy out there capable of hitting the 3 and it opens up the lane for guys like poythress to dominate at times.

 

[LmdCat]

Well one was JUCO and the other her played in and against a glorified church league so I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on those two .

You seem to always have an answer no matter how ridiculous it is. These players have been evaluated by the best scouts in the game which is how they received the rating that they got. If they were incapable of playing, the scouts would have determined that well before this point.

Before you respond, Cal is included in those who declared these players able to compete at this level of athletics. Certainly, you would never consider him to be one that can't evaluate talent.

 

[yoshukai]

You seem to always have an answer no matter how ridiculous it is. These players have been evaluated by the best scouts in the game which is how they received the rating that they got. If they were incapable of playing, the scouts would have determined that well before this point.

Before you respond, Cal is included in those who declared these players able to compete at this level of athletics. Certainly, you would never consider him to be one that can't evaluate talent.

I don't even know what we're arguing about,lol . I was meaning it might take Skal and Mulder a little longer to adjust to the speed and physicality of D1 basketball because of their backgrounds . Sorry if I misunderstood.