Author Topic: crushing  (Read 27316 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 45934
  • big roas man
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #100 on: February 12, 2011, 11:33:36 PM »
I love when people act like "just missing shots" is somehow independent of basketball skill. Like "we played pretty good, just missed a bunch of shots."

Guess what? Making effing shots is a big effing part of playing effing basketball.

Don't tell me you are missing the point of that.

If we forced shots or didn't generate bad shots that would be one thing. But this team has been about making 3s when we play well. Tonight we had a lot of really good looks from 3. I'm not saying I expect us to hit 40% or something, but heck, just hit 35% (about our average) and we win.

Throw in the number of 2PT shots we missed (which was even worse, a terrible 10-32) and its even worse.

Again, the defense was solid, rebounding, drawing fouls, protecting the ball.  All good enough to win, all better than what CU did.

But at the end of the day we just missed shots, and missed many more open looks/good shots than CU.

what % did cu shoot?


CU shot 2-10 from 3, 17-33 from 2. 46.5% eFG%.
KSU shot 6-20 from 3, 10-32 from 2. 36.5% eFG%.

While CU did shoot really well from the FT line, we offset that by getting to the line more. Both teams scored 18 from the FT line, though its fair to point out that we left some points there.

Every other category (RBing, ORBing TOs, Assists) we were better than CU.

So yeah, in this game "we just missed shots" is a very legitimate argument. Very.

who shot the shots? what is their average? how does it compare to the outcome? i don't expect or want you to do the math but it seems like it could be taken a step further. like... if kstate has a guy that usually doesn't make shots and that guy shot a lot and he didn't make them then it's not like kstate shot worse than avg because they in fact had people that usually don't make shots taking shots.

If you are talking shot distribution the only person who really stands out as shooting either extremely more or less than their average was Southwell.  He only had 35 FG attempts on the season coming into the game.  He was 1-5 tonight.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 45934
  • big roas man
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #101 on: February 12, 2011, 11:35:45 PM »
I love when people act like "just missing shots" is somehow independent of basketball skill. Like "we played pretty good, just missed a bunch of shots."

Guess what? Making effing shots is a big effing part of playing effing basketball.

Don't tell me you are missing the point of that.

If we forced shots or didn't generate bad shots that would be one thing. But this team has been about making 3s when we play well. Tonight we had a lot of really good looks from 3. I'm not saying I expect us to hit 40% or something, but heck, just hit 35% (about our average) and we win.

Throw in the number of 2PT shots we missed (which was even worse, a terrible 10-32) and its even worse.

Again, the defense was solid, rebounding, drawing fouls, protecting the ball.  All good enough to win, all better than what CU did.

But at the end of the day we just missed shots, and missed many more open looks/good shots than CU.

what % did cu shoot?


CU shot 2-10 from 3, 17-33 from 2. 46.5% eFG%.
KSU shot 6-20 from 3, 10-32 from 2. 36.5% eFG%.

While CU did shoot really well from the FT line, we offset that by getting to the line more. Both teams scored 18 from the FT line, though its fair to point out that we left some points there.

Every other category (RBing, ORBing TOs, Assists) we were better than CU.

So yeah, in this game "we just missed shots" is a very legitimate argument. Very.

who shot the shots? what is their average? how does it compare to the outcome? i don't expect or want you to do the math but it seems like it could be taken a step further. like... if kstate has a guy that usually doesn't make shots and that guy shot a lot and he didn't make them then it's not like kstate shot worse than avg because they in fact had people that usually don't make shots taking shots.

Also Doc was 1-6 from behind the line, he was a 38% shooter going into the game.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 45934
  • big roas man
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #102 on: February 12, 2011, 11:39:29 PM »
I love when people act like "just missing shots" is somehow independent of basketball skill. Like "we played pretty good, just missed a bunch of shots."

Guess what? Making effing shots is a big effing part of playing effing basketball.

Don't tell me you are missing the point of that.

If we forced shots or didn't generate bad shots that would be one thing. But this team has been about making 3s when we play well. Tonight we had a lot of really good looks from 3. I'm not saying I expect us to hit 40% or something, but heck, just hit 35% (about our average) and we win.

Throw in the number of 2PT shots we missed (which was even worse, a terrible 10-32) and its even worse.

Again, the defense was solid, rebounding, drawing fouls, protecting the ball.  All good enough to win, all better than what CU did.

But at the end of the day we just missed shots, and missed many more open looks/good shots than CU.

what % did cu shoot?


CU shot 2-10 from 3, 17-33 from 2. 46.5% eFG%.
KSU shot 6-20 from 3, 10-32 from 2. 36.5% eFG%.

While CU did shoot really well from the FT line, we offset that by getting to the line more. Both teams scored 18 from the FT line, though its fair to point out that we left some points there.

Every other category (RBing, ORBing TOs, Assists) we were better than CU.

So yeah, in this game "we just missed shots" is a very legitimate argument. Very.

who shot the shots? what is their average? how does it compare to the outcome? i don't expect or want you to do the math but it seems like it could be taken a step further. like... if kstate has a guy that usually doesn't make shots and that guy shot a lot and he didn't make them then it's not like kstate shot worse than avg because they in fact had people that usually don't make shots taking shots.

If you are talking shot distribution the only person who really stands out as shooting either extremely more or less than their average was Southwell.  He only had 35 FG attempts on the season coming into the game.  He was 1-5 tonight.

Actually the last 6 games Shane has averaged 1-4 from the field, so he wasn't outside of his norm either.

Offline kso_FAN

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 29506
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #103 on: February 12, 2011, 11:42:45 PM »
Also Doc was 1-6 from behind the line, he was a 38% shooter going into the game.

This was a big one. I thought every one of his looks was solid. Give him those and I'd expect him to hit 3-6 every time.

Irving had a couple really good looks. 




Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40815
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #104 on: February 12, 2011, 11:46:47 PM »
there were a ton of good looks.  it was definitely a missed shot night, not a offensive clusterfuck night.
"a garden city man wondered in april if the theologians had not made a mistake in locating the garden of eden in asia rather than in the arkansas river valley."

Offline Cartierfor3

  • Fattyfest Champion
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 27689
  • I just want us all to be buds.
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #105 on: February 12, 2011, 11:49:50 PM »
not even a mention on ESPN.  we fell to a college basketball afterthought so rough ridin' fast

Offline chum1

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 22438
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #106 on: February 12, 2011, 11:51:15 PM »
even undefeated teams shoot worse than their average in half their games.  i just don't know what the eff you guys are talking about.

Offline kougar24

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5380
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #107 on: February 12, 2011, 11:51:55 PM »
there were a ton of good looks.  it was definitely a missed shot night, not a offensive clustereff night.

It's sad that every game has been one or the other (or both, like Fla.). And by sad I mean rough ridin' pathetic.

Offline kso_FAN

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 29506
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #108 on: February 12, 2011, 11:52:38 PM »
even undefeated teams shoot worse than their average in half their games.  i just don't know what the eff you guys are talking about.

What's "worse than average"? Over 12% worse than your "average" night?

Offline KSU Scott

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 40
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #109 on: February 12, 2011, 11:54:24 PM »
even undefeated teams shoot worse than their average in half their games.  i just don't know what the eff you guys are talking about.

176th in the NCAA in FG %

Offline 0.42

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7746
  • pasghetti
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #110 on: February 12, 2011, 11:56:26 PM »
not even a mention on ESPN.  we fell to a college basketball afterthought so rough ridin' fast

ESPN doesn't cover non-Top 25 games often unless UNC or Duke (and maybe KU) are playing

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 45934
  • big roas man
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #111 on: February 12, 2011, 11:58:09 PM »
even undefeated teams shoot worse than their average in half their games.  i just don't know what the eff you guys are talking about.

176th in the NCAA in FG %

 :goodbyecruelworld:  We're playing chess and you're eating play-doh  I'm done responding to you.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 45934
  • big roas man
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #112 on: February 13, 2011, 12:00:38 AM »
there were a ton of good looks.  it was definitely a missed shot night, not a offensive clustereff night.

It's sad that every game has been one or the other (or both, like Fla.). And by sad I mean rough ridin' pathetic.

Yeah isn't this the case for everyone who loses?  If either of these things are the case then it would be bad defense.  Would bad defense make you feel better?

Offline KSU Scott

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 40
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #113 on: February 13, 2011, 12:04:29 AM »
even undefeated teams shoot worse than their average in half their games.  i just don't know what the eff you guys are talking about.

176th in the NCAA in FG %

 :goodbyecruelworld:  We're playing chess and you're eating play-doh  I'm done responding to you.

yet, you do...in between your other name-dropping posts. 

Offline Dr Rick Daris

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 23381
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #114 on: February 13, 2011, 12:05:44 AM »
there were a ton of good looks.  it was definitely a missed shot night, not a offensive clustereff night.

don't you think cu could say the same though comparo to what they usually do? how was burks tonight? am i wrong here?

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40815
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #115 on: February 13, 2011, 12:11:51 AM »
there were a ton of good looks.  it was definitely a missed shot night, not a offensive clustereff night.

don't you think cu could say the same though comparo to what they usually do? how was burks tonight? am i wrong here?

i wouldn't think so.  i'd guess that a cu fan (if they had lost) would complain about his team not oboarding and committing unforced turnovers.  and either blaming the refs or blaming his team for not driving/posting up more.

but i dunno.  it's hard trying to see things from someone else's viewpoint.  maybe they'd just bitch about the four missed fts.
"a garden city man wondered in april if the theologians had not made a mistake in locating the garden of eden in asia rather than in the arkansas river valley."

Offline kougar24

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5380
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #116 on: February 13, 2011, 12:28:19 AM »
there were a ton of good looks.  it was definitely a missed shot night, not a offensive clustereff night.

It's sad that every game has been one or the other (or both, like Fla.). And by sad I mean effing pathetic.

Yeah isn't this the case for everyone who loses?  If either of these things are the case then it would be bad defense.  Would bad defense make you feel better?

I didn't say "every loss," I said "every game." Even our wins are rough ridin' pathetic offensively, either scheme-wise or shot-wise.

THIS TEAM is rough ridin' pathetic offensively. There's really no way around that.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40815
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #117 on: February 13, 2011, 12:30:00 AM »
THIS TEAM is rough ridin' pathetic offensively.

well no crap.
"a garden city man wondered in april if the theologians had not made a mistake in locating the garden of eden in asia rather than in the arkansas river valley."

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 45934
  • big roas man
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #118 on: February 13, 2011, 12:33:51 AM »
there were a ton of good looks.  it was definitely a missed shot night, not a offensive clustereff night.

It's sad that every game has been one or the other (or both, like Fla.). And by sad I mean effing pathetic.

Yeah isn't this the case for everyone who loses?  If either of these things are the case then it would be bad defense.  Would bad defense make you feel better?

I didn't say "every loss," I said "every game." Even our wins are rough ridin' pathetic offensively, either scheme-wise or shot-wise.

THIS TEAM is rough ridin' pathetic offensively. There's really no way around that.

You must have missed my post about you arguing a point that everyone agrees with.

Offline Dr Rick Daris

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 23381
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #119 on: February 13, 2011, 01:11:59 AM »
there were a ton of good looks.  it was definitely a missed shot night, not a offensive clustereff night.

don't you think cu could say the same though comparo to what they usually do? how was burks tonight? am i wrong here?

i wouldn't think so.  i'd guess that a cu fan (if they had lost) would complain about his team not oboarding and committing unforced turnovers.  and either blaming the refs or blaming his team for not driving/posting up more.

but i dunno.  it's hard trying to see things from someone else's viewpoint.  maybe they'd just bitch about the four missed fts.

maybe cusys would say those things, but cudaris and the other 10,000 cu fans would say "jfc, we went 2/10 from three and burks was 0/3 from three and 3/13 from overall. we just had a bad shooting night or we would've won."

i dunno. it's just frustrating. i'm usually on board w/ the "shots just didn't fall" stuff, but tonight i'm just not. whatever. i'm sure you guys are prob right.

Offline kougar24

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5380
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #120 on: February 13, 2011, 01:18:01 AM »
there were a ton of good looks.  it was definitely a missed shot night, not a offensive clustereff night.

don't you think cu could say the same though comparo to what they usually do? how was burks tonight? am i wrong here?

i wouldn't think so.  i'd guess that a cu fan (if they had lost) would complain about his team not oboarding and committing unforced turnovers.  and either blaming the refs or blaming his team for not driving/posting up more.

but i dunno.  it's hard trying to see things from someone else's viewpoint.  maybe they'd just bitch about the four missed fts.

maybe cusys would say those things, but cudaris and the other 10,000 cu fans would say "jfc, we went 2/10 from three and burks was 0/3 from three and 3/13 from overall. we just had a bad shooting night or we would've won."

i dunno. it's just frustrating. i'm usually on board w/ the "shots just didn't fall" stuff, but tonight i'm just not. whatever. i'm sure you guys are prob right.


No. Stay strong rd.

Offline swish1

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 351
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #121 on: February 13, 2011, 01:21:00 AM »
there were a ton of good looks.  it was definitely a missed shot night, not a offensive clustereff night.

don't you think cu could say the same though comparo to what they usually do? how was burks tonight? am i wrong here?

i wouldn't think so.  i'd guess that a cu fan (if they had lost) would complain about his team not oboarding and committing unforced turnovers.  and either blaming the refs or blaming his team for not driving/posting up more.

but i dunno.  it's hard trying to see things from someone else's viewpoint.  maybe they'd just bitch about the four missed fts.

maybe cusys would say those things, but cudaris and the other 10,000 cu fans would say "jfc, we went 2/10 from three and burks was 0/3 from three and 3/13 from overall. we just had a bad shooting night or we would've won."

i dunno. it's just frustrating. i'm usually on board w/ the "shots just didn't fall" stuff, but tonight i'm just not. whatever. i'm sure you guys are prob right.


its definitely disappointing that while shutting down burks we still manage to lose.  a lot of that is because the only real offensive threat we have had an off night.  when the team lacks depth/talent and the talent has an off night its hard to overcome.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 45934
  • big roas man
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #122 on: February 13, 2011, 01:22:03 AM »
there were a ton of good looks.  it was definitely a missed shot night, not a offensive clustereff night.

don't you think cu could say the same though comparo to what they usually do? how was burks tonight? am i wrong here?

i wouldn't think so.  i'd guess that a cu fan (if they had lost) would complain about his team not oboarding and committing unforced turnovers.  and either blaming the refs or blaming his team for not driving/posting up more.

but i dunno.  it's hard trying to see things from someone else's viewpoint.  maybe they'd just bitch about the four missed fts.

i dunno. it's just frustrating. i'm usually on board w/ the "shots just didn't fall" stuff, but tonight i'm just not. whatever. i'm sure you guys are prob right.


I'm still waiting for the alternative argument for tonight's loss other than "the shots didn't fall."  "We are a bad offensive basketball team," is for all intents and purposes the same thing.  The end result of good offense are shots going into the basket.

Offline kougar24

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5380
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #123 on: February 13, 2011, 01:26:11 AM »
there were a ton of good looks.  it was definitely a missed shot night, not a offensive clustereff night.

don't you think cu could say the same though comparo to what they usually do? how was burks tonight? am i wrong here?

i wouldn't think so.  i'd guess that a cu fan (if they had lost) would complain about his team not oboarding and committing unforced turnovers.  and either blaming the refs or blaming his team for not driving/posting up more.

but i dunno.  it's hard trying to see things from someone else's viewpoint.  maybe they'd just bitch about the four missed fts.

i dunno. it's just frustrating. i'm usually on board w/ the "shots just didn't fall" stuff, but tonight i'm just not. whatever. i'm sure you guys are prob right.


I'm still waiting for the alternative argument for tonight's loss other than "the shots didn't fall."  "We are a bad offensive basketball team," is for all intents and purposes the same thing.  The end result of good offense are shots going into the basket.

I'm curious as to what you want to hear. We're a horrid offensive team, and only a good defensive team about half the time, which in my book makes us a bad team overall, or at best completely mediocre. That's plenty of cause for a meltdown.

Just because it isn't shocking that we were held to <60 points doesn't make it less frustrating. The more it happens, the more frustrating it is.

Offline Dr Rick Daris

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 23381
    • View Profile
Re: crushing
« Reply #124 on: February 13, 2011, 01:30:45 AM »
there were a ton of good looks.  it was definitely a missed shot night, not a offensive clustereff night.

don't you think cu could say the same though comparo to what they usually do? how was burks tonight? am i wrong here?

i wouldn't think so.  i'd guess that a cu fan (if they had lost) would complain about his team not oboarding and committing unforced turnovers.  and either blaming the refs or blaming his team for not driving/posting up more.

but i dunno.  it's hard trying to see things from someone else's viewpoint.  maybe they'd just bitch about the four missed fts.

i dunno. it's just frustrating. i'm usually on board w/ the "shots just didn't fall" stuff, but tonight i'm just not. whatever. i'm sure you guys are prob right.


I'm still waiting for the alternative argument for tonight's loss other than "the shots didn't fall."  "We are a bad offensive basketball team," is for all intents and purposes the same thing.  The end result of good offense are shots going into the basket.

hmmm. i'm going to have to sleep on this. i was pretty worked up earlier when i was formulating whatever argument i had at the time. i guess we just aren't good, which i kind of already knew but maybe i just don't want to admit it or something. i mean, maybe we should've been swept by cu. maybe they are just better than us.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2011, 01:33:01 AM by Rick Daris »