A few things we've learned | Page 3 | Syracusefan.com

A few things we've learned

just looking at the box score buddy had 16 points but it took 18 shots to get there. not very efficient again. every other player who scored for us was in the plus column fg att / points.
 
just looking at the box score buddy had 16 points but it took 18 shots to get there. not very efficient again. every other player who scored for us was in the plus column fg att / points.

Except when he was 7-14 for 50% he was and you tried saying he wasn't. So you can say that this game, but you couldn't then. Maybe you just struggle with math?
 
here's the numbers 4 games in. (fga/pts).
elijah (52/65). buddy (53/50). jg3 (28/41). beck( 23/36). sid (13/27). Q (19/29)
so the math suggest buddy is our least efficient scorer. not a good thing for a high volume shooter.
 
here's the numbers 4 games in. (fga/pts).
elijah (52/65). buddy (53/50). jg3 (28/41). beck( 14/36). sid (13/27). Q (19/29)
so the math suggest buddy is our least efficient scorer.

And you're going to love it when he doesn't play well as it will fit your narrative.
 
High volume shooters often are less effecient. they take more shots and more shots that need to be taken.
 
larry bird,

shot 27,21,28,24 from 3 his 2-5 yrs as a celtic and they got the finals twice. but he shot 90% fts and forced them to play him and opened it up for other people.
 
I would like to see us push for Dolezaj, Guerrier and Sidibe to hit the 28-35 ppg together, not the 24-26. Nothing is more enjoyable then knocking down a pair of threes after scoring 8 points inside.
 
Last edited:

Forum statistics

Threads
167,603
Messages
4,714,876
Members
5,909
Latest member
jc824

Online statistics

Members online
257
Guests online
2,203
Total visitors
2,460


Top Bottom