For all you guys who were gonna call in - JBs weekly show is now live

[OttoMets]

Shot .469 in 2007-08 when Andy and Devo were hurt, but made 11-34 threes.

Shot .494 in 2008-09, but only made 10-44 threes.

Boy do I miss the days when the scapegoats who "couldn't shoot" made almost half of their shots.

 

[sufandu]

JB doesn't need have to say what the fan base wants to hear. Doesn't.

Which is why what he says lends honest insight into what he is thinking, which may be even more concerning. A coach and players should never go into a game thinking they don't have a chance. Fans shouldn't be told they can't expect to have a chance against what should be a peer program.

 

[Scooch]

Defends Buddy and says he's been "a little off". Says hes shootign the equivalent of 42-43% from the 2 being at 27% from the 3.

I've been debating whether to post this, but seems like the right thread for it...

I think the best three point shooter we've had in the past 10 years was probably Andrew White. I wanted to see how good *and* consistent he was.

I looked at games where he took 5 or more three point attempts (I figure anything less than that gets kind of fluky), and then broke that into (a) great = made 40% or more, (b) OK = made 33-39%, and (c) bad = under 33%.

There were 31 games in 2016-17 where White took 5+ three-point attempts (out of 34 games total), and he was great in 15 of them, OK in 8, and bad in 8.

Result = 74% of the time he was great/OK, and 26% of the time he was bad.

Then there's Buddy. I looked at last season, and this season-to-date. 43 games in total for him, 39 where he took 5+ three point attempts.

Great = 14, OK = 6, bad = 19.

Result = 51% of the time he's been great/OK, 49% of the time he's been bad. Nineteen times, almost half of games, he's shot under 33% from three. Far too much volatility.

I don't like to pile on, and I'll say yet again that Buddy is not the biggest problem with the team. But he is just not nearly the elite gunner that people make him out to be. And he's not "a little off". He's a streaky shooter who, about one-third of the time, goes off. The problem is that half the time he's sub-par to ice cold. He doesn't have the floor that our elite three point shooters have had, historically.

 

[PauliePeppas]

I've been debating whether to post this, but seems like the right thread for it...

I think the best three point shooter we've had in the past 10 years was probably Andrew White. I wanted to see how good *and* consistent he was.

I looked at games where he took 5 or more three point attempts (I figure anything less than that gets kind of fluky), and then broke that into (a) great = made 40% or more, (b) OK = made 33-39%, and (c) bad = under 33%.

There were 31 games in 2016-17 where White took 5+ three-point attempts (out of 34 games total), and he was great in 15 of them, OK in 8, and bad in 8.

Result = 74% of the time he was great/OK, and 26% of the time he was bad.

Then there's Buddy. I looked at last season, and this season-to-date. 43 games in total for him, 39 where he took 5+ three point attempts.

Great = 14, OK = 6, bad = 19.

Result = 51% of the time he's been great/OK, 49% of the time he's been bad. Nineteen times, almost half of games, he's shot under 33% from three. Far too much volatility.

I don't like to pile on, and I'll say yet again that Buddy is not the biggest problem with the team. But he is just not nearly the elite gunner that people make him out to be. And he's not "a little off". He's a streaky shooter who, about one-third of the time, goes off. The problem is that half the time he's sub-par to ice cold. He doesn't have the floor that our elite three point shooters have had, historically.

Nailed it

 

[OttoMets]

I've been debating whether to post this, but seems like the right thread for it...

I think the best three point shooter we've had in the past 10 years was probably Andrew White. I wanted to see how good *and* consistent he was.

I looked at games where he took 5 or more three point attempts (I figure anything less than that gets kind of fluky), and then broke that into (a) great = made 40% or more, (b) OK = made 33-39%, and (c) bad = under 33%.

There were 31 games in 2016-17 where White took 5+ three-point attempts (out of 34 games total), and he was great in 15 of them, OK in 8, and bad in 8.

Result = 74% of the time he was great/OK, and 26% of the time he was bad.

Then there's Buddy. I looked at last season, and this season-to-date. 43 games in total for him, 39 where he took 5+ three point attempts.

Great = 14, OK = 6, bad = 19.

Result = 51% of the time he's been great/OK, 49% of the time he's been bad. Nineteen times, almost half of games, he's shot under 33% from three. Far too much volatility.

I don't like to pile on, and I'll say yet again that Buddy is not the biggest problem with the team. But he is just not nearly the elite gunner that people make him out to be. And he's not "a little off". He's a streaky shooter who, about one-third of the time, goes off. The problem is that half the time he's sub-par to ice cold. He doesn't have the floor that our elite three point shooters have had, historically.

White's team was so disappointing at the time that I didn't appreciate him fully. But he was great. And the stats don't tell the full story - he was so closely guarded, and he made so many shots that he probably shouldn't have even taken. Just circus shots. But they went in.

 

[sufandu]

I've been debating whether to post this, but seems like the right thread for it...

I think the best three point shooter we've had in the past 10 years was probably Andrew White. I wanted to see how good *and* consistent he was.

I looked at games where he took 5 or more three point attempts (I figure anything less than that gets kind of fluky), and then broke that into (a) great = made 40% or more, (b) OK = made 33-39%, and (c) bad = under 33%.

There were 31 games in 2016-17 where White took 5+ three-point attempts (out of 34 games total), and he was great in 15 of them, OK in 8, and bad in 8.

Result = 74% of the time he was great/OK, and 26% of the time he was bad.

Then there's Buddy. I looked at last season, and this season-to-date. 43 games in total for him, 39 where he took 5+ three point attempts.

Great = 14, OK = 6, bad = 19.

Result = 51% of the time he's been great/OK, 49% of the time he's been bad. Nineteen times, almost half of games, he's shot under 33% from three. Far too much volatility.

I don't like to pile on, and I'll say yet again that Buddy is not the biggest problem with the team. But he is just not nearly the elite gunner that people make him out to be. And he's not "a little off". He's a streaky shooter who, about one-third of the time, goes off. The problem is that half the time he's sub-par to ice cold. He doesn't have the floor that our elite three point shooters have had, historically.

I think he would be better if his job was to stand outside and wait for kickouts instead of being the first or second option on offense. Marius Janulis comes to mind but I think Buddy has a few more tools. Of course that would require us to have the pieces to allow for that. Buddy could thrive on a team with Flynn and AO.

 

[br801]

Easy when it's all layups.

He eventually came to terms with his limitations. He attempted fewer than one 3-pointer per game and didn't seem to take many deep 2-pointers.

 

[DilemaCuse]

JB doesn't need have to say what the fan base wants to hear. Doesn't.

Ok, but what do the players think after hearing that?
What would recruits think after hearing that?
Jim's not projecting a winning message for the current state of affairs, if things continue he may be better of not doing the show with those statements

 

[Briancuse]

Ok, but what do the players think after hearing that?
What would recruits think after hearing that?
Jim's not projecting a winning message for the current state of affairs, if things continue he may be better of not doing the show with those statements

I would not think highly. For the record I didn't think we were winning that game. But we won there last year and gtech almost beat them sat.

 

[SUOrangeSU]

These two are just not meant to be full time starters on an ACC level team...maybe BC or lower level one but one that wants to compete with the upper tier, they just can't hang. It doesn't mean they don't belong on this level or can't contribute, but 30-35mpg with either...and yes I'm saying EITHER of these two...is not good.

Based on the interview, you can tell he is scrambling to find positives (ie well it's like he's shooting 45% of 2 pointers) and won't listen to anyone else (fans, assistants, hell even JW I bet) about feedback or adjusting. He's going to ride this until the end of the season.

If anyone doesn't seem the exact scenario of the later years of Bobby Knight and some of these other long time LEGENDARY coaches that let the game get a little bit pass them, you're lying to yourself. It's completely a dictatorship now but because he is the face of the brand, it's going to continue.

 

[OrangeDW]

I've been debating whether to post this, but seems like the right thread for it...

I think the best three point shooter we've had in the past 10 years was probably Andrew White. I wanted to see how good *and* consistent he was.

I looked at games where he took 5 or more three point attempts (I figure anything less than that gets kind of fluky), and then broke that into (a) great = made 40% or more, (b) OK = made 33-39%, and (c) bad = under 33%.

There were 31 games in 2016-17 where White took 5+ three-point attempts (out of 34 games total), and he was great in 15 of them, OK in 8, and bad in 8.

Result = 74% of the time he was great/OK, and 26% of the time he was bad.

Then there's Buddy. I looked at last season, and this season-to-date. 43 games in total for him, 39 where he took 5+ three point attempts.

Great = 14, OK = 6, bad = 19.

Result = 51% of the time he's been great/OK, 49% of the time he's been bad. Nineteen times, almost half of games, he's shot under 33% from three. Far too much volatility.

I don't like to pile on, and I'll say yet again that Buddy is not the biggest problem with the team. But he is just not nearly the elite gunner that people make him out to be. And he's not "a little off". He's a streaky shooter who, about one-third of the time, goes off. The problem is that half the time he's sub-par to ice cold. He doesn't have the floor that our elite three point shooters have had, historically.

Let’s hope he pulls an “Andy Rautins” and makes the leap to elite shooter and excellent overall player his last year and half.

 

[Fly Rodder]

These two are just not meant to be full time starters on an ACC level team...maybe BC or lower level one but one that wants to compete with the upper tier, they just can't hang. It doesn't mean they don't belong on this level or can't contribute, but 30-35mpg with either...and yes I'm saying EITHER of these two...is not good.

or at least in this system. I can definitely see either one thriving in a system with a defense that doesn't highlight their lack of the requisite physical gifts.

There are players in the NCAA D1 with much less skill than Buddy and Joe, they're just not being relied on to be Option A and B in a free-wheeling pick and roll offense and a defense where they have to be fast, lanky, and agile.

 

[OrangeDW]

or at least in this system. I can definitely see either one thriving in a system with a defense that doesn't highlight their lack of the requisite physical gifts.

There are players in the NCAA D1 with much less skill than Buddy and Joe, they're just not being relied on to be Option A and B in a free-wheeling pick and roll offense and a defense where they have to be fast, lanky, and agile.

THIS^^^^

Cant help but think both of them would be shooting 40% from 3 if they played for some of these other teams.

And they’d both likely be better defensively with 1)fewer minutes and perhaps most importantly 2)fewer minutes together defensively.

Cant help but wonder if each of them would get better looks and thus shoot a better % if they spent a higher % of their minutes playing alongside Kadary, too. If the majority of their 3s were coming off kickouts with their feet set (like pretty much all of Virginia’s 3s against us), I think the numbers would look a lot better.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Andrew White singlehandedly won us games. He made unbelievably tough shots. He also averaged over 40 mpg for like a 2 month stretch. Read that again. OVER 40mpg.

Guy was solid. And people ripped on us getting grad transfers. With zero clue, of course.

 

[DilemaCuse]

These two are just not meant to be full time starters on an ACC level team...maybe BC or lower level one but one that wants to compete with the upper tier, they just can't hang. It doesn't mean they don't belong on this level or can't contribute, but 30-35mpg with either...and yes I'm saying EITHER of these two...is not good.

Based on the interview, you can tell he is scrambling to find positives (ie well it's like he's shooting 45% of 2 pointers) and won't listen to anyone else (fans, assistants, hell even JW I bet) about feedback or adjusting. He's going to ride this until the end of the season.

If anyone doesn't seem the exact scenario of the later years of Bobby Knight and some of these other long time LEGENDARY coaches that let the game get a little bit pass them, you're lying to yourself. It's completely a dictatorship now but because he is the face of the brand, it's going to continue.

And probably next year, and the year after that...

Unless Benny is better than expected and they are forced to run the offense through him

 

[721Comstock]

Andrew White singlehandedly won us games. He made unbelievably tough shots. He also averaged over 40 mpg for like a 2 month stretch. Read that again. OVER 40mpg.

Guy was solid. And Moqui ripped on us getting grad transfers. With zero clue, of course.

FIFY.

AWIII was an absolute horse for us that year.
Ditto for John Gillon.
Duke & NCState are 2 standouts, but he came up huge in some other wins too.

For the "people" who use that season to say "nEVeR tAkE GrAD tRAnsFErZ aGaIN!!!" -
just imagine how awful that year woulda been WITHOUT Uncle Drew and John Gillon.
< shudders >

 

[OrangeDW]

Andrew White singlehandedly won us games. He made unbelievably tough shots. He also averaged over 40 mpg for like a 2 month stretch. Read that again. OVER 40mpg.

Guy was solid. And people ripped on us getting grad transfers. With zero clue, of course.

We really wouldn’t have won 10 games without White and Gillon. We would’ve been historically awful for us.

 

[realorange]

THIS^^^^

Cant help but think both of them would be shooting 40% from 3 if they played for some of these other teams.

And they’d both likely be better defensively with 1)fewer minutes and perhaps most importantly 2)fewer minutes together defensively.

Cant help but wonder if each of them would get better looks and thus shoot a better % if they spent a higher % of their minutes playing alongside Kadary, too. If the majority of their 3s were coming off kickouts with their feet set (like pretty much all of Virginia’s 3s against us), I think the numbers would look a lot better.

I've said this a couple times. Neither JG or BB are point guards and when they play together, it becomes an average type of ball movement, if I can put it that way. Unless they get one or more of the other players working with them, their number of quality shots is fairly low.

With Kadary at the point, alongside one of the two mentioned, they are able to take advantage of the ball movement that Kadary brings. It even seems that when he is in the game that JG or BB in the game at the time, will move better as well.

I don't know how he presents it to JG and BB, but Kadary needs to have more meaningful time and the two of them less as a result.

Oh, and give Braswell time to get comfortable out there. The kid has a lot to offer.

 

[Scooch]

Let’s hope he pulls an “Andy Rautins” and makes the leap to elite shooter and excellent overall player his last year and half.

Using my admittedly random criteria, in Rautins senior year he had 17 "great" three point shooting games, 3 "OK" and 8 "bad". 71% great/OK, 29% bad. We need that kind of elite shooter.

 

[sufandu]

Let’s hope he pulls an “Andy Rautins” and makes the leap to elite shooter and excellent overall player his last year and half.

I think that will depend on what can be placed around him.

 

[ROCcuse]

There's no game this Sat so I am thinking a debate between you and Cuse Runner, we will pick 5 subjects and winner gets the Pfizer vaccine. Can't wait to get your take on the yankees payroll, lock down curfews, COVID in teens and young adults and Craft beer vs the blue collar beer, CR will be fired up to defend his Coors lights and White Claws.

I know how that would end:

 

[Chip]

I have called 11 times. Line answers and goes dead

I wouldn’t have thought they had caller ID.

 

[kirbivore]

That kraut from UVA showed us what a real elite shooter looks like. JB been trying to gaslight us about how great his "shooters" really are.

 

[Chip]

I've been debating whether to post this, but seems like the right thread for it...

I think the best three point shooter we've had in the past 10 years was probably Andrew White. I wanted to see how good *and* consistent he was.

I looked at games where he took 5 or more three point attempts (I figure anything less than that gets kind of fluky), and then broke that into (a) great = made 40% or more, (b) OK = made 33-39%, and (c) bad = under 33%.

There were 31 games in 2016-17 where White took 5+ three-point attempts (out of 34 games total), and he was great in 15 of them, OK in 8, and bad in 8.

Result = 74% of the time he was great/OK, and 26% of the time he was bad.

Then there's Buddy. I looked at last season, and this season-to-date. 43 games in total for him, 39 where he took 5+ three point attempts.

Great = 14, OK = 6, bad = 19.

Result = 51% of the time he's been great/OK, 49% of the time he's been bad. Nineteen times, almost half of games, he's shot under 33% from three. Far too much volatility.

I don't like to pile on, and I'll say yet again that Buddy is not the biggest problem with the team. But he is just not nearly the elite gunner that people make him out to be. And he's not "a little off". He's a streaky shooter who, about one-third of the time, goes off. The problem is that half the time he's sub-par to ice cold. He doesn't have the floor that our elite three point shooters have had, historically.

I bet Buddy and Joe shoot better at practice than anyone we’ve had recently. Other than maybe White. The two of them would probably put on a show in a 3 point shooting contest.

But having consistency in games isn’t exactly the same skill set. And it just hasn’t happened yet. Sure, some games against some defenses, it pops. But as you’re showing, it’s not consistent at all. And when it’s off, it crushes our offense.

But now we know we’re stuck with it, because they have to stay in there in the off chance they heat up.

 

[Scotch]

Using my admittedly random criteria, in Rautins senior year he had 17 "great" three point shooting games, 3 "OK" and 8 "bad". 71% great/OK, 29% bad. We need that kind of elite shooter.

Rautins was a far better all-around player than Buddy or Joe, but was asked to play a smaller role in the offense because of the talent around him. Perfect microcosm of the state of the program.