Looks like KV has been reading my post again...

[fishwater99]

<h3>3-point dependence</h3>

<span class="pp"></span>It was no secret that Mississippi State's basketball team this past season relied heavily on the 3-point shot. But it's not until a look at the numbers until you realize just how drastic the dependence was.Some 44.5 percent of State's shot attempts were 3-pointers - the highest such mark in the Southeastern Conference. Auburn was second with 42.8 percent; Ole Miss was third with 36.4 percent. Georgia was last with 24.6 percent.But being at the top or bottom doesn't guarantee success. The SEC's four NCAA Tournament teams were from the middle of the pack - Nos. 5, 6, 8 and 9 on the list.<span class="aa"></span></p>
http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20100324/SPORTS030102/3240326/1079/RSS0202

09-10 44.45% of fg's were 3 pointers vs 31.79% for our opponents
08-09 39.79% of fg's were 3 pointers vs 30.53% for our opponents
07-08 36.58% of fg's were 3 pointers vs 35.14% for our opponents

MSU lives and dies by the 3 ball. Wonder if we shoot even more with Big Boy Renardo playing out on the perimeter next year.
It would be nice for our coach to implement a real offense that's not jacking up the first open 3 pointer, I guess some of us can still dream.....

 

[fishwater99]

<h3>3-point dependence</h3>

<span class="pp"></span>It was no secret that Mississippi State's basketball team this past season relied heavily on the 3-point shot. But it's not until a look at the numbers until you realize just how drastic the dependence was.Some 44.5 percent of State's shot attempts were 3-pointers - the highest such mark in the Southeastern Conference. Auburn was second with 42.8 percent; Ole Miss was third with 36.4 percent. Georgia was last with 24.6 percent.But being at the top or bottom doesn't guarantee success. The SEC's four NCAA Tournament teams were from the middle of the pack - Nos. 5, 6, 8 and 9 on the list.<span class="aa"></span></p>
http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20100324/SPORTS030102/3240326/1079/RSS0202

09-10 44.45% of fg's were 3 pointers vs 31.79% for our opponents
08-09 39.79% of fg's were 3 pointers vs 30.53% for our opponents
07-08 36.58% of fg's were 3 pointers vs 35.14% for our opponents

MSU lives and dies by the 3 ball. Wonder if we shoot even more with Big Boy Renardo playing out on the perimeter next year.
It would be nice for our coach to implement a real offense that's not jacking up the first open 3 pointer, I guess some of us can still dream.....

 

[benatmsu]

**

 

[Sutterkane]

[No message]

 

[hatfieldms]

Yeah Veazey couldn't figure this out on his own. He had to read fishwater99 constantly repeating Coach34's talking points to realize we shoot a lot of 3s

 

[wbc40]

nm

 

[AlCoDog]

in the thousands of posts fishwater has made covering this subject, but fishwater is the one who invented the phrase, "live and die by the 3."

 

[KurtRambis4]

of the other years where we were at or below the average?

 

[whatever.sixpack]

Isn't there a rule against making the EXACT same topic on consecutive days? Why don't you just bump your old posts? Can't figure out how?

 

[tenureplan]

that someone can say the same thing as much as you do, yet not really say anything. Just like your mentor, you are only painting 1/2 of the picture. Sure we shot alot of 3's. But if we made a larger percentage of our 3's than the rest of the league, that would be a good thing. So then you would have to compare the points we get off of our 3's to what we would get off of shooting more 2's. lets take a look...



Lets look at points per shot:

Vanderbilt 1.39
Kentucky 1.36
Arkansas 1.29
Georgia 1.28
Auburn 1.27
Mississippi State 1.27
Mississippi 1.26
Tennessee 1.25
Florida 1.23
Alabama 1.22
South Carolina 1.14
LSU 1.1


wow we are ahead of 2 tourny teams...

now lets look at our point distribution per game:
(cant get formatting right...3 columns shots/total per gm/grand total)
shots total grand
2 point shots: 32 31.78686965 58.79767397
3 point shots: 25 27.01080432


The SEC average of 3 pointers attempted per game was 18ish. So lets apply that to the above distribution:


shots total grand
2 point shots: 39 38.74024738 58.1880265
3 point shots: 18 19.44777911


Wow, our points would have gone down with a higher percentage of 2 pointers attempted.

Now what if we shot more 3's?
shots total grand
2 point shots: 26 25.82683159 59.32022895
3 point shots: 31 33.49339736


Oh wow, we would have scored more.



So in summary fishy, your constant rhetoric holds no weight. Go fish...

We did what we had to do due to lacking a true inside presence. Which is what all of the posters here with half a brain already knew.

 

[paindonthurt_]

We shot 3s b/c stans rarely runs an offense. I don't know why, but thats the way it is. Hell we showed we could score some inside when we got decent looks. Coincidentally by running an offense.

See first game against Kentucky and SEC tourn.

 

[TheHorrorTheHorror]

in the thousands of posts fishwater has made covering this subject, but fishwater is the one who inventedhas driven into the ground,the phrase, "live and die by the 3."

fixed it for ya

 

[tenureplan]

we shot 49.5% from 2 and 36% from 3. which means on a point per shot basis, we got more from 3's. Fish's argument wasn't that we didn't run enough offense; it was that we put up too many 3's.



Maybe you missed that Kodi couldn't make layups or that Jarvis struggled against physical defenders or that Osby can't play with his back to the basket and charges more than my wife does. Lets not forget that our backup PF is 6'3".

 

[KurtRambis4]

Would the fact that we were a better perimeter team than an inside team have something to do with this?

 

[Uncle Leo]

As I said the other day (repeat posting?), as long as 1.5*(3-pt FG%) > 2-pt FG%, we should continue to shoot 3-pointers.

I am not at all for jacking up the first one you see, but shooting from outside is a smart strategy given our personnel. You have to take smart shots, regardless of where you're taking them, and that's something we don't always do. I will always be against taking dumb shots. We stilltake what seems to be more than our fair share of dumb shots (both inside and outside the arc).

 

[Dawgbreeze]

Texas Tech put up a 30+ footer last night with 6 seconds left. Sure we had some guys force shots at times but we did what we can do. This constant debate proves only that Fish and coach can't go a day without being obsessed with Stansbury. What's new?

 

[fishwater99]

Stats from the SEC site, of course these are conference only, which is really a bettercomparison due to our really weakOOC schedule.

48.46% from 2 pointers
31.8% from 3 pointers..

And it's 45.18% of all shots were 3 pointers in the SEC, which is just crazy..

Do the math McClure, we would score more per game if we shot more two pointers.

FIELD GOAL PERCENTAGES
## Team G FG FGA Pct
---------------------------------------------
1.Georgia............. 16 412 877 .470
2.Vanderbilt.......... 16 400 868 .461
3.Kentucky............ 16 428 941 .455
4.Florida............. 16 406 908 .447
5.Ole Miss............ 16 431 972 .443
6.Tennessee........... 16 409 927 .441
7.Alabama............. 16 381 885 .431
8.Arkansas............ 16 414 962 .430
9.Auburn.............. 16 406 946 .429
10.Mississippi State... 16 388 948 .409
11.South Carolina...... 16 396 987 .401
12.LSU................. 16 335 885 .379

3-POINT FG PCT
## Team G FG FGA Pct
---------------------------------------------
1.Georgia............. 16 91 230 .396
2.Vanderbilt.......... 16 93 255 .365
3.Ole Miss............ 16 120 334 .359
4.Auburn.............. 16 144 415 .347
5.Alabama............. 16 89 257 .346
6.Arkansas............ 16 105 310 .339
7.Florida............. 16 89 274 .325
8.Mississippi State... 16 136 428 .318
9.South Carolina...... 16 116 369 .314
10.Kentucky............ 16 91 300 .303
11.Tennessee........... 16 87 291 .299
12.LSU................. 16 74 264 .280

MSU....... Living and dying by the 3 pointer.......b/c Stans has no other offense.

If you don't like my posts, then you are free to ignore them...

 

[KurtRambis4]

I guess ultimately you are correct. Stansbury has no other offense. We have no inside threat. Jarvis is a joke inside. I can't tell you how many times I saw him turn the ball over when he got double teamed, or when he put up a 4 foot hook. Then, you've got Wendell Lewis and John Riek backing him up. Not Good. Osby and Kodi have done nothing to show me that they can post anyone up to this point.

 

[Optimus Prime 4]

shot, and fast break points off of each for your opponent.

 

[dickiedawg]

Freudian slip?<div>
</div><div>He only has one.</div>

 

[paindonthurt_]

66% of women love me.

66% of women in my family love me. See what I did there.

yes making 3s is better than making 2s. and yes we are a good 3 point shooting team (at times) so we should use that to our advantage. What your PERCENTAGES dont show are the games we lost b/c we couldn't hit a bull in the *** with a bass fiddle. Hence the reason we were 21-10 and a very mediocre team on the national level.

Having a good 3 point shooting team should make us a lot better inside. Problem is it didn't b/c we run **** for offense.

On those games where we were off on the 3s we just kept jacking them up. We never did anything to get those needed baskets when baskets were hard to come by. Thats where being a good offensive coach comes in. When you are in a drought, you should run plays/offenses that give you open high percentage looks.

We simply ran around like a JV team jacking up every shot possible.

 

[paindonthurt_]

they are partially right. While overbearing about it, they are right.

We were 21 and 10 b/c our coach is mediocre just like our record. We don't win close games. We don't beat good teams. We lose to bad teams.

= = = = mediocre.

With a little offense at times to go along with our stifling defense, we'd have been at least a 5 seed.

 

[tenureplan]

Only considering SEC games,;if you add the tourney games in, the percentages are 32.5 vs 48.8; which ends up in a statistical wash. Ironically, we shot the 3 very poorly vs Vandy (27.7%) and won; we shot it well verses Kentucky (37%) and lost.


As another poster stated, shot selection could be critized, but that goes for 2's as much as it does 3's.


Further, most would agree that the non-conference losses were what kept us out of the tourney. We were shooting 3's well above 40% non-conference.


Your insistence that the number of 3's we put up can be directly attributed to our w-l record is about as asinine as Stan's insistence that Phil Turner is a 4.


Although I feel like we had good players at each position, I think we had too many players good at the same things. We lacked team balance. So more 3's were put up because that is what those particular players were good at. The downfall of this team was a lack of a balance of complimentary skills across the board.

 

[fishwater99]

http://www.secsports.com/sport_stats/mbasketball/confonly.htm

So we would have scored more points if we shot more 2 pointers instead of 3 pointers.
I guess it's just hard for you to admit that I am correct. Stats don't lie.

My whole point is that we rely on the 3 pointer b/c our coach has failed to implement an effective offense over the past several years.
In the past we had a playmaker to run his "motion" through, J-Money, LR, Mario, etc..
Stan's just can't coach on the offensive side of the court, on the other hand he is one of the best defensive coaches in the SEC.
You can get good looks from inside the arc by running plays. Back screens for layups, running a high low with Kodi and SWAT, the dribble driveare a few examples. Stans either just can't coach offensive basketball, or he is just too lazy, that's a fact. All he has is the "motionless" motion offense, known as the stand and shoot a 3. He let's players take bad shots early in the possession without any consquences. Stans was the one who recruited and signed these players, so he is the one who decided to live and die by the 3 ball.

 

[Dawgbreeze]

Will this crap ever end. You are not going to get him fired, so let it go. Believe me, Stans would much rather pound it inside but with Kodi and Osby and Reik, none of them can make anything other than a dunk and they can't make them all the time. We did the only thing we could half way do decently. Get over it!

 

[fishwater99]

"What did we learn from this? Well, that 44.5 percent of State’s field goal attempts were from behind the arc. (Just Saturday, in State’s loss to North Carolina, it was an even 50 percent.) This doesn’t take into account makes and misses, just attempts. And it’s obviously not an indicator of success. None of the top four teams made the NCAA tournament and neither did any of the bottom three. (Maybe being in the middle is the key.)Just interesting, especially in light of the recent criticism of State’s offense."

http://blogs.clarionledger.com/msu/2010/03/24/how-dependent-was-state-on-the-3-we-compare-to-other-sec-schools/

Iwill never ***** about taking the ball down low. But you can have an offense besides the 3 point shot. Run a high low with Kodi and Jarvis, the dribble drive and dish, back screens ala the Princeton offense. Stans just has no clue on the offensive end. He is a good defensive coach, but he has really been exposed on the offensive end of the floor the past few years. He is the coach, he signed our players and he has decided to die by the 3 ball.

 

[tenureplan]

but, to mention the NC game and to think that the number of 3's were the reason we lost when we hit 37% of them is ridiculous. I am sure that is a higher % than Kodi's within 3 feet of the basket.

Also, for the record, I did see us run plenty of screens, double screens, dribble drive, high-low, and pick and rolls this year. We even ran back cuts in a few games.

Look at Calipari, his teams are almost entirely 100% dribble-drive. If Stans did that, you would be bitching about it because we wouldn't be successful with it because we dont have the PERSONEL for that type of offense. Sure, Stans recruited the players we have, so it ultimately falls on him because their his players. However, he can't just cherry pick whoever he wants. I think Stans does a fairly good job of changing the offense based on the personel we have. In the Johnson-Austin-Roberts years, people bitched that we didn't shoot enough 3's. Maybe you were too young to watch basketball then or you have alzheimer's.

 

[fishwater99]

tenureplan[/b]]Also, for the record, I did see us run plenty of screens, double screens, dribble drive, high-low, and pick and rolls this year. We even ran back cuts in a few games.

Look at Calipari, his teams are almost entirely 100% dribble-drive. If Stans did that, you would be bitching about it because we wouldn't be successful with it because we dont have the PERSONEL for that type of offense. Sure, Stans recruited the players we have, so it ultimately falls on him because their his players. However, he can't just cherry pick whoever he wants. I think Stans does a fairly good job of changing the offense based on the personel we have. In the Johnson-Austin-Roberts years, people bitched that we didn't shoot enough 3's. Maybe you were too young to watch basketball then or you have alzheimer's.

Not sure what games you were watching, but the fewtimes we actually ran the high low with Kodi and Swat it worked very well. I don't recall seeing a single double screen by this team. You can't even call what our guys were doing this year screens, sticking a knee or arm out. When is the last time a MSU player set a screen and knocked their guy down? Osby and SWAT worked the pick and roll to perfection, too badwe only ran it a couple of times. I think I saw one backdoor cut all season. These areall things that we should be doing all year long in the same games. BTW I was in school at MSU before Stans was even an assistant there.
And you still won't admit thatI am correct saying that we would have scored more if we shot more2 pointers than 3 pointers this year, even after I refuted your data.
Have a nice day SHEEP.

 

[Dawgbreeze]

But these basketball legions in their own mind who post and ***** all the time probably have not been to one of our practices and I know for a fact, coaches usually design their offenses around their personnel. I guess it goes with message boards but I will reiterate, it doesn't make a damn what any of us think, Stans is going to be the coach at least for 2 or 3 more years and all the bitching in the world by Coach, Fish, and their enterouge is not going to change that. Get over it and start complaing about something important, like what these clowns in Washington are doing to the country.

 

[tenureplan]

Single Screen - Off the ball on the weak side on just about every set play we run

Double Screen - Usually set for Barry or Ravern at the top of the key where they have the option to shoot the 3 or peel off and drive to the basket

Ugly Screens - Phil sets a good screen, he gets nice and wide. Kodi usually had to be pointed to where the screen needed to be set and yes it looked effortless. Jarvis also set poor screens because he was to focused on the roll back to the basket.

Not knocking down people on screens - If you haven't noticed, most of our players are light in the ***; the ones that aren't (Kodi & Osby) play like they are.

Refuting of data - I chose not to respond to your rebuttle, but per the stats you pasted, every team had 16 games played...which meant it was only the regular season; so I still contend that if you add in the tourney games, the difference is a wash.</p>

Sheep - BAAAAAAAAA; would that make you the little boy that cried wolf?

</p>