The Labradors are back (ISU adv stats part 2)

[sonofdaxjones]

I recall several backdoor baskets in the 1st half for them . . . I do give Christopherson (?) credit, so then comes the next question, why 29 minutes for Spradling and 15 for Shane?





 

[Powercat Posse]

Christophersen was shooting good all day.     But their other shooters started out OK but didnt finish with great numbers

Allen made his first two 3pt shots as the Clonies (not counting #11) started out 3-6 from 3pt, but were 3-17 after that. 


We fell behind 27-14 with just over 5 minutes in 1st half, and Iowa St only made 13 of their last 38 shots.   And Christophersen was 7-10 of that 13-38.
Our D against him was bad for about 90% of the game, but i thought we did an OK job on everyone else

[ednksu]

actually there are more.  you can:

(1) go over the screen
(2) go over the screen, quick hedge from the screener's defender
(3) go under the screen, bumping the screener
(4) go under the screen, quick hedge from the screener's defender
(5) switch
(6) trap

there are a variety of ways to attack high ball screens.  JO and angel f*cked that one up.  Again, that one play didn't lose the game, it was just one of many plays that did.

1 and 2 are the same thing as are 3 and 4.  5 and 6 are absurd notions for an average/above average high major guard.  It isn't CYO basketball, there is a reason why you don't see teams trap from high ball screens.  The only teams I see switch screens are teams like Mizzou who play four guards.  If they switch that you have JO guarding Christopherson.  You whined when JO guarded Jones against WVU so now you're proposing this?  LOL.  When you're red assed about literally everything the potential of double talk is quite high.  You run out of ways to rationalize being irrational.

1/2 and 3/4 are not the same.  5 works if you have a player like Rodney at the 4, but they should switch back asap.

You don't get stuck behind the screen or go under it leaving 5+ ft of space against a team that has hit more 3s than anyone else in conference by a decent margin (+17 before the game I think).

[sonofdaxjones]

Christophersen was shooting good all day.     But their other shooters started out OK but didnt finish with great numbers

Allen made his first two 3pt shots as the Clonies (not counting #11) started out 3-6 from 3pt, but were 3-17 after that. 


We fell behind 27-14 with just over 5 minutes in 1st half, and Iowa St only made 13 of their last 38 shots.   And Christophersen was 7-10 of that 13-38.
Our D against him was bad for about 90% of the game, but i thought we did an OK job on everyone else

I believe they doubled us up on 2nd chance points.   

Babb was Spradling like, so toss those 2 out, and ISU was 50% from behind the arc while K-State is still 25%.

[Powercat Posse]

yeah they had 14-6 edge on 2nd chance points

11 3pt makes is too many to give up  even if it really was only one guy who was hot hot.    That is why i say our defense on everyone else was OK, not great 

I will take 13-43fg and 6-23 3pt shooting from their non white boys anyday.     The lousy job we did on SC kinda diminishes those stats though

[MakeItRain]

I recall several backdoor baskets in the 1st half for them . . . I do give Christopherson (?) credit, so then comes the next question, why 29 minutes for Spradling and 15 for Shane?

I had the same question.

[sonofdaxjones]

yeah they had 14-6 edge on 2nd chance points

11 3pt makes is too many to give up  even if it really was only one guy who was hot hot.    That is why i say our defense on everyone else was OK, not great 

I will take 13-43fg and 6-23 3pt shooting from their non white boys anyday.     The lousy job we did on SC kinda diminishes those stats though

The history of Bramlage is that it's always somebody.   

[kso_FAN]

Our defense wasn't great, but we should be able to beat most people at home when we hold them to 1.05 points per possession. We can't keep having shooting nights in the mid-40s and win.

We also had our worst offensive rebounding game of the season and only our 3rd game of the year under 30% OR%. If we aren't going to hit shots, then we better get offensive rebounds. Granted, ISU is very good at not giving up oboards, but we still had a decent effort in Ames. And then we only have a FT rate of 33%. Frank's teams have proven over and over we can make up for bad shooting by winning these two stats and we didn't get it done. It was just another case of this team finding ways to lose in a close game.

[CloneBroChill]

Can't be a labrador when Mastiffs come to play....Or to be simpler for you folk, can't be a cat, gotta be more like a dog....

[nicname]

hoiball has worked our defense 3 out of 4 times the two teams have met. 

Hoi's Oeff% vs. Cats
10-11

@ISU 125
@KSU 79.7

11-12

@ISU 116.1
@KSU 103.2

[kso_FAN]

hoiball has worked our defense 3 out of 4 times the two teams have met. 

Hoi's Oeff% vs. Cats
10-11

@ISU 125
@KSU 79.7

11-12

@ISU 116.1
@KSU 103.2

Our defense was not great, but good enough to win; our biggest problem defensively was allowing ISU to have 50% of their shots be threes. 28 attempts was the most we've given up all year. This was a game where you really see the value of looking at eFG% as the comparative number. Regular FG% we "held them" to 41% for the game and on 2pt shots only 43%, but their eFG% was 51.5% because of the large amount of attempts and hitting 39% from 3.

[nicname]

Yeah, I was thinking about that blog post someone, I think you _Fan, posted about the percentage of total shots take from three while watching the game.

[Powercat Posse]

11 3s at almost 40% clip is pretty hurtful

Another thing that hurt was we only had 6 2nd chance pts.   The 10 off boards is 5 less than our average.... but only getting 6 points from those 10 extra chances is not real effecient either.       Isu turned their 11 off boards into 14 pts