Well, I'm sure it is no surprise to you, but I'm surprised that Carr earned 14 points. I just didn't notice him being that productive. Nothing spectacular just solid play so much so that I was thinking he only scored about 8.
Lol cmon guys, he was talking about that stretch there when we went 2-13, he's right. A top 25 team will make us pay for that.If we shot 35.15% from 3 for the whole season it would be the 22nd best 3 point shooting team in our entire history. And we are pretending it’s a bad shooting night? If it is, and most nights we shoot better, then we definitely aren’t getting beat much.
That's how his stats are going to go all year - solid performance that you don't realize until later when you look at the box score.Well, I'm sure it is no surprise to you, but I'm surprised that Carr earned 14 points. I just didn't notice him being that productive. Nothing spectacular just solid play so much so that I was thinking he only scored about 8.
Do you realize that the adjusted field goal percentage on 3’s is 52% and overall is 63%. No offense, but that is pretty good shooting and I get your point about Robinson being the only one who shot an acceptable percentage and skewed the numbers.Robinson was the only dude that could make a 3 for us. We shoot like that as a team against a quality opponent, we are beat.
Agreed whole-heartedly. I'm extremely happy with where things are, while also being realistic (in my mind) about expectations.If we are a top 25ish 4/6 seed in tournament I will be very happy considering what CMP walked into .
Yeah, I get it. That's just why +/-, especially for an individual player in a one game sample size, just isn't a great measure of performance.Yeah I don't think this means he's our best player, or that hes going to post 40's many more times. It's just that, for this game specifically, when he was on the floor, the team had a 40pt difference. Now that could just simply be that the guys happened to make shots when he was in, and miss shots when he was out. But I'd like to think that his presence is what helped the team create that disparity.. Ball movement, body spacing, defense, all of it. Just think it's pretty cool when someone can affect the game like that, while not having the individual stats to show it.
To be fair, there's been less than 40 seasons of the 3 pt line in college. The 22nd best team would rank in the bottom half, if your numbers are accurate.If we shot 35.15% from 3 for the whole season it would be the 22nd best 3 point shooting team in our entire history. And we are pretending it’s a bad shooting night? If it is, and most nights we shoot better, then we definitely aren’t getting beat much.
To be fair, there's been less than 40 seasons of the 3 pt line in college. The 22nd best team would rank in the bottom half, if your numbers are accurate.
Agreed, I think they'll shoot it very well. They will need to, as I agree with your concerns on defense and rebounding. I'm curious what happens when teams are athletic enough to run them off the line too. I'm excited about everything that lies ahead, but also pretty nervous about it too. Which is in stark contrast to the last few seasons where I was just growing tired of the same stale approach.Good point. I think this team will average above 35% from deep with plenty of room to spare. Should be a top 10 level 3pt shooting team. If we have weaknesses, they will be more centered around rebounding, defense, and/or turnovers.
We will have off shooting nights, but our averages will be solid.
The basketball will move faster than any player, so as long as there is a lot more passing than dribbling in the half court, it will be hard to get us off the line.Agreed, I think they'll shoot it very well. They will need to, as I agree with your concerns on defense and rebounding. I'm curious what happens when teams are athletic enough to run them off the line too. I'm excited about everything that lies ahead, but also pretty nervous about it too. Which is in stark contrast to the last few seasons where I was just growing tired of the same stale approach.
And our best 3 point shooters were cold against MSt; this team will shoot closer to 40% than 35%. We're certainly not always going to shoot 75% from 2 point range but we'll shoot a lot better than 35% sometimes. I know I'd take last night's offensive efficiency any game.Do you realize that the adjusted field goal percentage on 3’s is 52% and overall is 63%. No offense, but that is pretty good shooting and I get your point about Robinson being the only one who shot an acceptable percentage and skewed the numbers.
The point I want to make is, it does’t matter how you get to 35% from 3, it is still an adjusted rate of 52%. That is good shooting, especially when you combine that with an insane 75% from within the arc. That will win you most games, as long as you don’t allow the other team to shoot a higher percentage from three at a high number of attempts.
I think Pope is going to be more worried about how they let the other team shoot at a 39% clip from three on a good number of attempts.
Agreed. I honestly thought, especially the first half, the whole team played and looked bad. Heck, even Jaxson had three turnovers in the first 10 possessions or so. Just looked sloppy. To be expected. That’s why exhibition games exist and it’s 12 totally new dudes learning their roles and/or trying to impress enough to change them. A lot of people surprised/excited about Garrisons offense. When I see him I think he forces too much offense. I’ll be interested to see how much of that remains come Monday when stuff counts.Some of you need to look at each player’s line instead of the team stat.
Robinson scorched the nets, the rest of the team did not.
That happens against good competition and we are beat.
Not bashing the team, just stating what I observed.
Robinson bailed us out last night. No one else shot the ball well from 3, which is what I was talking about.
Robinson was 8-12 from 3.
Everyone else was 5-25 from 3.
Some of you need to look at each player’s line instead of the team stat.
Robinson scorched the nets, the rest of the team did not.
That happens against good competition and we are beat.
Not bashing the team, just stating what I observed.
Robinson bailed us out last night. No one else shot the ball well from 3, which is what I was talking about.
We might not see another game all year where Robinson takes 11 three points shots and we know Brea is a very good shooter even though he was cold. We hit 75% of our two point shots and 35% of our threes; even if our 2 point percentage is 20% lower, that doesn't equal a loss with any kind of defense. Also, 35% equals 35% no matter how it's made up and 35% is what Pope's less talented BYU team shot last year. For this UK team it might be a below average shooting game. This team is also making less turnovers than we're causing, so I'm very pleased with what the team has shown so far. But we'll know a little more after the 1st real game.Some of you need to look at each player’s line instead of the team stat.
Robinson scorched the nets, the rest of the team did not.
That happens against good competition and we are beat.
Not bashing the team, just stating what I observed.
Robinson bailed us out last night. No one else shot the ball well from 3, which is what I was talking about.
Robinson was 8-12 from 3.
Everyone else was 5-25 from 3.
Dude, you are over analyzing my statement.Are you worried about our three point shooting? The averages indicate we have an abundance of competent shooters.
It’s one game. If Robinson doesn’t take his 12 3s then other guys would have and we don’t know what happens with that counterfactual. Some games will be like this where we feed the hot hand. Robinson won’t take this many every night. I think guys like Brea, Carr, Oweh, Almonor, Kriisa, and even Butler will fill the void with good percentages when we need it. Are we capable of having an off night shooting as a team? Of course. But I don’t think we need to worry about this as much as the rest of the field because we are lucky to have plenty of makers on this team.
No, you don’t understand how statistics work. It doesn’t matter iif one or all contribute to an effective shooting percentage of 63%. As long as we are not letting them shoot a higher percentage in 3’s than we do, we will be fine, all other things being close to equal. Every person is going to have an off night. As long as collectively we shoot a higher 3 pt percentage than the opponent, we will do well. Work on defending the 3. We have too many shooters to go below 35% on any long term basis.Some of you need to look at each player’s line instead of the team stat.
Robinson scorched the nets, the rest of the team did not.
That happens against good competition and we are beat.
Not bashing the team, just stating what I observed.
Robinson bailed us out last night. No one else shot the ball well from 3, which is what I was talking about.
Robinson was 8-12 from 3.
Everyone else was 5-25 from 3.
Hey man . Have you watched the new series on Netflix about the Zodiac?I hadn't noticed how low most of our player numbers are.
Also, when did they start allowing greater than number 5 on uniforms? Apparently this year.
No, but I'm about 95% sure who the zodiac was.Hey man . Have you watched the new series on Netflix about the Zodiac?
You don’t seem to understand that the level of competition affects the game as well.No, you don’t understand how statistics work. It doesn’t matter iif one or all contribute to an effective shooting percentage of 63%. As long as we are not letting them shoot a higher percentage in 3’s than we do, we will be fine, all other things being close to equal. Every person is going to have an off night. As long as collectively we shoot a higher 3 pt percentage than the opponent, we will do well. Work on defending the 3. We have too many shooters to go below 35% on any long term basis.
Interesting take . So let’s discount the best players performance on other teams and see how they do .Some of you need to look at each player’s line instead of the team stat.
Robinson scorched the nets, the rest of the team did not.
That happens against good competition and we are beat.
Not bashing the team, just stating what I observed.
Robinson bailed us out last night. No one else shot the ball well from 3, which is what I was talking about.
Robinson was 8-12 from 3.
Everyone else was 5-25 from 3.
Well the show is centered on Leigh Allen and his family. Pretty interesting. It’s not a movie , it has interviews with members of the Seawater family.No, but I'm about 95% sure who the zodiac was.
Mike Morford is who I trust.
Who are they saying it is?
Morf says William McDuff Andrew.
That guy is the most guilty seeming guy to be innocent I've ever seen. None of the evidence points to him.Well the show is centered on Leigh Allen and his family. Pretty interesting. It’s not a movie , it has interviews with members of the Seawater family.
Seems like some some pretty compelling evidence on this Netflix thing. Curious what you’d think about it. If you watch it let me know what you think.That guy is the most guilty seeming guy to be innocent I've ever seen. None of the evidence points to him.
Mac, Andrew was a prison guard guarding. Charles Manson. The zodiac was guarding Manson. At least he worked at a prison where Manson was. Mac was quite a bit younger than what they were looking for.
I don't mean this as a shot at you at all, just using your post as an example. But...Some of you need to look at each player’s line instead of the team stat.
Robinson scorched the nets, the rest of the team did not.
That happens against good competition and we are beat.
Not bashing the team, just stating what I observed.
Robinson bailed us out last night. No one else shot the ball well from 3, which is what I was talking about.
Robinson was 8-12 from 3.
Everyone else was 5-25 from 3.
That's why it's a team sport.Some of you need to look at each player’s line instead of the team stat.
Robinson scorched the nets, the rest of the team did not.
That happens against good competition and we are beat.
Not bashing the team, just stating what I observed.
Robinson bailed us out last night. No one else shot the ball well from 3, which is what I was talking about.
Robinson was 8-12 from 3.
Everyone else was 5-25 from 3.
We have a lot of people who have a habit/hobby of looking in every nook and cranny for the negative.I don't mean this as a shot at you at all, just using your post as an example. But...
I find it amusing how so many people said, "KY is a good team but they don't have a "dude" (God I hate that word now) that can go get a bucket when the team needs it. Well, we showed that we clearly have that guy, and now we see posts saying basically, "you relied on a dude to get baskets and that will cost you games." The irony makes me chuckle.
Dude, you are over analyzing my statement.
I simply said that if we play a really good team and shoot like this (sans Robinson), we get beat.
if we come out against Duke and only one guy can hit the broad side of a barn, they will beat the brakes off of us.
Doesn’t mean I think that will happen.
Doesn’t mean I expect that to happen.
It’s a simple observation.
The only guy with a decent percentage from 3 last night was Robinson.
We won’t beat good teams if we shoot like that.
This was against a D2 team with 6’6-6’7 big men.
They were in the game until we took it to them inside. That is what won the game for us. Butler and Oweh taking it to the rim. Carr and Garrison just being too big and athletic for their frontcourt to handle.
We play Duke in less than two weeks. Are you confident that we can get to the rim against their defense, if the 3 ball is not falling?
In the SEC, if we have a cold shooting night, can we get to the rim at will against that level of competition?
It’s just a simple observation, you can disagree, but you don’t seem to get what I am saying and are making assumptions.
I shouldn’t be surprised, I’ve been on this board for 20 years, people get all tore up about the silliest things on here.
BumpYou better hope he's not the best player, but he's definitely the straw that stirs the drink. If Lamont Butler is the THE BEST player on this team, .500 might not be a realistic goal. He's just not that type of player. But he's a guy you need if you're going to be really good.
So you bump it after a one off game? Beating what will probably be a .500 Louisville team. Bold strategy Cotton. I’ll stand by it. Especially with this SEC. If Butler is the best player, our Cats are going to struggle. But, and hang with me here b/c it really seems like you’ve got an axe to grind, if Lamont Butler isn’t on the court this team will really struggle as well. Probably a tough concept for someone who uses a career game against an average opponent to prove some sort of point, but read slowly and maybe you’ll be able to digest it.Bump
It would be hard for me to say who is the “best player “ but it’s not unreasonable for someone to think Butler is the “most valuable “ player.So you bump it after a one off game? Beating what will probably be a .500 Louisville team. Bold strategy Cotton. I’ll stand by it. Especially with this SEC. If Butler is the best player, our Cats are going to struggle. But, and hang with me here b/c it really seems like you’ve got an axe to grind, if Lamont Butler isn’t on the court this team will really struggle as well. Probably a tough concept for someone who uses a career game against an average opponent to prove some sort of point, but read slowly and maybe you’ll be able to digest it.
I think this is reasonably accurate. Problem is, that big comeback against the Zags came without Butler. This team is so beautifully random. My one big worry is, nobody knows who the go to dude is. But hey, the other team is part of the nobody as well. It’s an interesting dynamic.It would be hard for me to say who is the “best player “ but it’s not unreasonable for someone to think Butler is the “most valuable “ player.