Joe's PER double Starling's , what does it say about offenses

[Brooky03]

Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case. This for the starting lineup. Second graph: They attempt fewer layups and short 3s than average and take more mid-range jumpers and longer 3s. First graph: but they shoot a worse percentage from those mid-range and long distance threes and they're slightly less than average than D1 average for layups.

I can't control for what teams go into the D1 average, so consider that as well.

View attachment 236317

I’d be interested to know how the shot charts that go into this are compiled. The thing that stuck out to me is the deep threes. We don’t have guys launching NBA threes very often, to my eye. Who is in charge of placing the dots?

 

[Millhouse]

Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case. This for the starting lineup. Second graph: They attempt fewer layups and short 3s than average and take more mid-range jumpers and longer 3s. First graph: but they shoot a worse percentage from those mid-range and long distance threes and they're slightly less than average than D1 average for layups.

I can't control for what teams go into the D1 average, so consider that as well.

View attachment 236317

This is my problem not yours but I can read tables way better than info graphics. I don't know what the colors mean.

 

[Fly Rodder]

This is my problem not yours but I can read tables way better than info graphics. I don't know what the colors mean.

Blue is worse than D1 average, red is better than D1 average.

What Cusefan0307 posted above. We take too many shots from no man's land and don't even shoot well enough from there.

 

[Cuse House]

JJ has been much better the last three weeks of the season. His shooting has improved and he has been taking care of the ball better. I’ve been happy with his trajectory from the first game to now. Long way to go, but he is slowly figuring it out.

 

[two3zone]

Was looking at this yesterday. We take way too many shots in the mid range area and we are awful at them.

Been noticing this with just the eye test all year. We’re playing 90s NBA offensive basketball and there’s a reason nobody plays this way.

 

[two3zone]

JJ has been much better the last three weeks of the season. His shooting has improved and he has been taking care of the ball better. I’ve been happy with his trajectory from the first game to now. Long way to go, but he is slowly figuring it out.

Last three games he’s averaging 8.3 pts, 2.3 rbs, 1.3 ast, 1 stl, .7 turn, on 3-11 from three in 36 minueted a game. That’s not good.

 

[Millhouse]

Been noticing this with just the eye test all year. We’re playing 90s NBA offensive basketball and there’s a reason nobody plays this way.

We have a great test to learn from this year.

Why is Girard so much better and what can we learn from it?

Lazy people will just say, bah, Clemson is more talented

 

[DoctahLexus]

Bell will find his shot again and save our butts a couple of times like he did in the early season. He was a key piece before this cold streak (and darn near total breakdown against Duke). I still think getting him going on offense is our best hope for some success against tougher defenses. Gotta take the bad with the good given our teams shooting woes as a whole.

Call me crazy but I would give him some of JJs shooting guard minutes. We would actually have a shooting guard who can shoot (that is reasons 1-50 actually), he is quick enough to guard guys smaller than him and is better on defense than JJ (not saying much), his rebounding woes would matter less, we would still have Q out there at forward if we needed another guy to initiate with the ball. Is he inconsistent? Yes. Does he play like a basket case every now and then? Yes. Could I say that about everyone on the team except Maliq Brown? Also yes! It's far from perfect but we need to try something else there. I am so sick of this Judah JJ guard duo.

 

[Cstate]

We have a great test to learn from this year.

Why is Girard so much better and what can we learn from it?

Lazy people will just say, bah, Clemson is more talented

I will never pretend to be a basketball X’s and O’s expert……but I can say with 100% certainty two of the reasons is because they are all extremely unselfish and they all willingly pass the ball!

 

[CardiacCuse]

When it became obvious that Starling had no perimeter game
and Taylor couldn't find his shot the offense was in trouble.
There just aren't a lot of RELIABLE alternatives against
opponents that play an average or better defense. It'll
be a challenge to get to 17-18 wins.

what is the answer when teams take away penetration and iso ball? (as the good teams can)

heaven forbid if any of those teams also do not turn the ball over...then its total lights out.

honest question: how is Red's offensive scheme any different from JB's????

(only difference I see is that Red doesn't seem to value shooters in terms of roster construction...at least he didnt in his first chance at the portal)

for me, Red has changed the roster but not upgraded the offensive scheme at all.

whole lotta talk about the zone and going to man to man...and that has been great...but its not enough.

I wonder if the coaches realize that the offense is horrible...and maybe they got caught up in all the zone debates...and thought going to man was just going to solve everything?

newsflash: the offense needs A LOT OF WORK.

 

[MikeSU02]

Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case. This for the starting lineup. Second graph: They attempt fewer layups and short 3s than average and take more mid-range jumpers and longer 3s. First graph: but they shoot a worse percentage from those mid-range and long distance threes and they're slightly less than average than D1 average for layups.

I can't control for what teams go into the D1 average, so consider that as well.

View attachment 236317

Need more info, but ya. This isn’t good.

Still need to attack the rim. Win from four feet and in.

 

[SP_Gilbs]

I did a little digging into Starlings shooting and Im starting to wonder if he was a bit overrated in that regard coming out of high school. The only data I was able to find was his senior season at La Lumiere and his EYBL numbers prior to his senior season but it was still a decent sample size. In 15 games played he was 28/102 from three which is 27.4%. I know the form was a lot better in high school but the results (that I can find at least) are pretty similar to what we've seen the last 2 years.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

We have a great test to learn from this year.

Why is Girard so much better and what can we learn from it?

Lazy people will just say, bah, Clemson is more talented

Using players to optimize their talents allows them to be more efficient and effective

 

[two3zone]

I did a little digging into Starlings shooting and Im starting to wonder if he was a bit overrated in that regard coming out of high school. The only data I was able to find was his senior season at La Lumiere and his EYBL numbers prior to his senior season but it was still a decent sample size. In 15 games played he was 28/102 from three which is 27.4%. I know the form was a lot better in high school but the results (that I can find at least) are pretty similar to what we've seen the last 2 years.

This

 

[two3zone]

Using players to optimize their talents allows them to be more efficient and effective

I find it hard to believe Clemson’s coach is a genius, not saying he’s not a great coach but he was able to just pluck some guys and make them great? I get what you’re saying but we all said that Joe wasn’t being used the right way, and here we are again in the same spot wondering why guys aren’t put into a position to succeed, there are too many to count this year.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

I find it hard to believe Clemson’s coach is a genius, not saying he’s not a great coach but he was able to just pluck some guys and make them great? I get what you’re saying but we all said that Joe wasn’t being used the right way, and here we are again in the same spot wondering why guys aren’t put into a position to succeed, there are too many to count this year.

One coach has multiple options, and the other one has multiple good options.

 

[Fly Rodder]

One coach has multiple options, and the other one has multiple good options.

Yeah, having a senior PJ Hall and a senior JG3 is a good start to a top-20 team. Their top-4 guys in PER (Hall, Schieffelin, JG3, and Godfrey) are 1, 5, 2, and 6 on the team in FGAs. The two others in the top-6 in FGA (Wiggins and Hunter) are their top 3-point shooters other than Joe and Hall. And they're not slouches. For comparison, On Syracuse the top-5 in FGAs (and their respective team rank in PER) are, in order: Judah (4), Starling(6), Bell(7), Taylor (9), and Copeland (5).

Too many shots taken by guys who aren't scoring leads to poor efficiency.

Also, Syracuse's leaders in FGA have disappeared in admittedly limited conference play. PER isn't the end all be all, but it's a good barometer of offensive contributions.
Player (Season PER) (Conference PER)

Mintz (22.2) (10.8)​

Starling (10.6) (10.8)​

Bell (10.1) (-3.1)​

Taylor (9.0) (1.8)​

Copeland (20.1) (25.1)​

​

Brown (26) (31.6)​

​

Brown should be leading the team in FGA.

 

[pearl31]

2019-2023: HES NOT A P5 LEVEL PLAYER
2024: (he's the best guard in the ACC)

sarcasm?

 

[djcon57]

We have a great test to learn from this year.

Why is Girard so much better and what can we learn from it?

Lazy people will just say, bah, Clemson is more talented

I mean, that is one reason. Another is he's shooting less 2's.

 

[Cheriehoop]

Yeah, having a senior PJ Hall and a senior JG3 is a good start to a top-20 team. Their top-4 guys in PER (Hall, Schieffelin, JG3, and Godfrey) are 1, 5, 2, and 6 on the team in FGAs. The two others in the top-6 in FGA (Wiggins and Hunter) are their top 3-point shooters other than Joe and Hall. And they're not slouches. For comparison, On Syracuse the top-5 in FGAs (and their respective team rank in PER) are, in order: Judah (4), Starling(6), Bell(7), Taylor (9), and Copeland (5).

Too many shots taken by guys who aren't scoring leads to poor efficiency.

Also, Syracuse's leaders in FGA have disappeared in admittedly limited conference play. PER isn't the end all be all, but it's a good barometer of offensive contributions.
Player (Season PER) (Conference PER)

Mintz (22.2) (10.8)​

Starling (10.6) (10.8)​

Bell (10.1) (-3.1)​

Taylor (9.0) (1.8)​

Copeland (20.1) (25.1)​

​

Brown (26) (31.6)​

​

Brown should be leading the team in FGA.

That Schieffelin kid for Clemson really impresses me. He’s a stronger, older MaliQ averaging 10 rebounds in his 26 mpg played. Like Maliq he knows his role, plays smart and doesn’t even need to score to make a big impact in games.

 

[two3zone]

Yeah, having a senior PJ Hall and a senior JG3 is a good start to a top-20 team. Their top-4 guys in PER (Hall, Schieffelin, JG3, and Godfrey) are 1, 5, 2, and 6 on the team in FGAs. The two others in the top-6 in FGA (Wiggins and Hunter) are their top 3-point shooters other than Joe and Hall. And they're not slouches. For comparison, On Syracuse the top-5 in FGAs (and their respective team rank in PER) are, in order: Judah (4), Starling(6), Bell(7), Taylor (9), and Copeland (5).

Too many shots taken by guys who aren't scoring leads to poor efficiency.

Also, Syracuse's leaders in FGA have disappeared in admittedly limited conference play. PER isn't the end all be all, but it's a good barometer of offensive contributions.
Player (Season PER) (Conference PER)

Mintz (22.2) (10.8)​

Starling (10.6) (10.8)​

Bell (10.1) (-3.1)​

Taylor (9.0) (1.8)​

Copeland (20.1) (25.1)​

​

Brown (26) (31.6)​

​

Brown should be leading the team in FGA.

If JG3 is a good start to a top 20 team it seems ridiculous that people around here are dying on the Starling > JG3 hill.

 

[pearl31]

Among those strongly opining in this thread and other Girard-related threads, do you know what the conversation between Red and Girard entailed?
Follow-up, and not necessarily (but possibly) dependent on that first question- should Red/SU not have pursued Starling?

 

[Fly Rodder]

here are dying on the Starling > JG3 hill.

I'm not sure who those people are or how many there are. There'll always be some people who are hyperbolic (e.g., he can't play D1). I do think that if Girard was on this team instead of Starling, Joe wouldn't be shooting 45% from three and have a 20+ PER. Red is more or less running the same offense that JAB did. It's archaic.

 

[Cstate]

Among those strongly opining in this thread and other Girard-related threads, do you know what the conversation between Red and Girard entailed?
Follow-up, and not necessarily (but possibly) dependent on that first question- should Red/SU not have pursued Starling?

I’ve also been wondering this, but doubt it will ever truly come out. I mean did it go……

1.) Joe, thank you for your 4 years here, if you want to come back you will have to compete for your starting spot
2.) Joe, we are not sure about your M2M defensive ability, so you might not start/play very much
3.) Joe, we have had interest from JJ who was a former 5* so we are bringing him in
4.) Joe, we respectfully feel you should just look elsewhere to continue your basketball journey
5.) Joe, if you feel you can contribute as instant offense off the bench we would love to have you back as an older/leader figure on this team

******or did Joe decide to just leave after JAB wasn’t going to be the coach any longer*****

 

[djcon57]

I'm not sure who those people are or how many there are. There'll always be some people who are hyperbolic (e.g., he can't play D1). I do think that if Girard was on this team instead of Starling, Joe wouldn't be shooting 45% from three and have a 20+ PER. Red is more or less running the same offense that JAB did. It's archaic.

They don't get it. We literally saw Joe on this same team WITH Jesse last year. It didn't work. Joe is a fine 5th year SG. Anyone suggesting otherwise doesnt really know what they are talking about. Still feel he's not a P5 Starting PG.