Vandy is...
- Thread starter DAWG61
- Start date
I posted this on their board after our win when someone said they had a better SEC record against tougher competition. So far they have beat UGA, USC, Auburn, 'Bama, and now UT. 4 of the bottom teams in the league. UT is playing much better now and they beat the Hell out of them. Here is what's next for them
1
At Arkansas which is a different team at home. Get ready for the refs to call
it like they did back in Nolan's days because they beat us up physically and
made everything they threw up to the basket.
2. At Florida.- very good
chance for a L
3. LSU at home which should bea W
4. UK at home. Can you beat em? possible L
5. At Ole Miss. You think
W, but they are very physical at that dump and will be harder than you
think.
6. At UGA. Should be a W but a road game W
7. USC. W
8. At
UK
9. Florida at home
10. at UT who may be playing for post season
So, 3 almost sure wins vs LSU, UGA, and USC. Road games at UPig, TSUN, and UT could get a loss out of. Then they have 2 games each with UK and UF. I think at minimum they lose 3 of these games, which would still make them 12-4 which is very impressive. More than likely either UF or UK will sweep them, so I think they finish up at 11-5 which is still a very good SEC record. I'd take 11-5 any day of the week.
1
At Arkansas which is a different team at home. Get ready for the refs to call
it like they did back in Nolan's days because they beat us up physically and
made everything they threw up to the basket.
2. At Florida.- very good
chance for a L
3. LSU at home which should bea W
4. UK at home. Can you beat em? possible L
5. At Ole Miss. You think
W, but they are very physical at that dump and will be harder than you
think.
6. At UGA. Should be a W but a road game W
7. USC. W
8. At
UK
9. Florida at home
10. at UT who may be playing for post season
So, 3 almost sure wins vs LSU, UGA, and USC. Road games at UPig, TSUN, and UT could get a loss out of. Then they have 2 games each with UK and UF. I think at minimum they lose 3 of these games, which would still make them 12-4 which is very impressive. More than likely either UF or UK will sweep them, so I think they finish up at 11-5 which is still a very good SEC record. I'd take 11-5 any day of the week.
because they rely HEAVILY on the 3 ball... but when they are shooting well, they will be unstoppable. I'm glad to see us not relying on the 3 ball as much as we were last year, but we are still streaky with it. Vandy can easily win some they aren't supposed to win as well as they could lose some they should win.
...if MSU plays Vandy on a neutral floor, & if you remove the airplane hangar court ******** from the equation, MSU will beat Vandy by 10 going away.
We didn't have room to miss shots. Shooting 40% from behind the arc is a good game... and we had to shoot 50+% to keep up with them. Just sayin'. I'll challenge anyone to find the last game where we shot 50+% from 3 in an SEC game... much less 89% in a half. Doesn't happen often.
I think we have to hit some outside shots to keep teams from doubling down on the Moultrain (i.e. we have to keep the zone honest), but here are our 4 losses and 3pt percentages:
Akron (2 for 13)
Baylor (5 for 17)
Arkansas (9 for 20)
Ole Miss (10 for 29)
In my opinion, it's hard to say we "died by the 3" in any game other than Akron. Meanwhile we shot 3 of 17 vs. Bama, 5 of 16 vs. Tennessee, 5 of 17 vs. WVU, and 4 of 16 vs. Arizona, all nice wins for us. So it's not like we're living by the 3 either.
We might still be streaky with the 3 ball, but we shot above our average in 2 of our head-scratching losses, including nearly 50% vs. Arky.
Running some GRAD-LEVEL STATISTICS** on our season, our losses have been much more correlated with turnovers (11/g in wins, 15/g in losses) and points allowed (63ppg in wins, 74ppg in losses) than 3 point shooting.
Akron (2 for 13)
Baylor (5 for 17)
Arkansas (9 for 20)
Ole Miss (10 for 29)
In my opinion, it's hard to say we "died by the 3" in any game other than Akron. Meanwhile we shot 3 of 17 vs. Bama, 5 of 16 vs. Tennessee, 5 of 17 vs. WVU, and 4 of 16 vs. Arizona, all nice wins for us. So it's not like we're living by the 3 either.
We might still be streaky with the 3 ball, but we shot above our average in 2 of our head-scratching losses, including nearly 50% vs. Arky.
Running some GRAD-LEVEL STATISTICS** on our season, our losses have been much more correlated with turnovers (11/g in wins, 15/g in losses) and points allowed (63ppg in wins, 74ppg in losses) than 3 point shooting.
I meant Vandy relies heavily on the three... a lot like we did last year. This year, we are not having to rely on the 3 near as much because of our bigs and our ability to cut into the lane. I did, however, mean we are streaky with 3 point shooting, just like you pointed out.
Vandy would have beaten us by 20+ points if we had shot the ball like we did against Bama or Akron. Ole Miss was lost because we shot 3s (like they wanted us to) as much as we did 2 point shot, Akron and Detroit, but other than that, just like you pointed out, we don't rely near as much on the 3 as we have in the past.
Only a few games we have played (Detroit, Ole Miss, Vanderbilt) have been decided on our ability... or lack thereof... to shoot the 3.
And I completely agree with your grad-level analysis. You make a great point with turnovers and defense being more of an inconsistency than offensive production.
Sorry I wasn't as clear.
Vandy would have beaten us by 20+ points if we had shot the ball like we did against Bama or Akron. Ole Miss was lost because we shot 3s (like they wanted us to) as much as we did 2 point shot, Akron and Detroit, but other than that, just like you pointed out, we don't rely near as much on the 3 as we have in the past.
Only a few games we have played (Detroit, Ole Miss, Vanderbilt) have been decided on our ability... or lack thereof... to shoot the 3.
And I completely agree with your grad-level analysis. You make a great point with turnovers and defense being more of an inconsistency than offensive production.
Sorry I wasn't as clear.
I wasn't really convinced myself until I looked closer at the numbers. Thought it was interesting anyway.
And still lost<div>
</div><div>http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/boxscore?gid=201102150292
</div>
</div><div>http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/boxscore?gid=201102150292
</div>