national 3p% and 3pa

[CuseFaninVT]

Am I the only one who thinks limiting the stats to just conference play is arbitrary?

No. Stats from our early games against Sister Mary's Children of the Poor U. shouldn't be included in determining a player's effectiveness.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

What are you talking about? Half of the entry passes to Rak are from Cooney

That's just not true.

 

[Brooky03]

That's just not true.

Half is probably an exaggeration but they're certainly not coming primarily from Joseph. G might have the lions share.

 

[Millhouse]

We have no backup for Cooney and his shooting hasn't cost us any games this year that I can think of. Somebody else would have to take those shots and convert at a significantly higher clip. It's not as simple as just getting the ball to Rak more (we get him the ball virtually every chance we have) or letting G do all the shooting (he disappears for stretches). Just like GMac, if you take away his 1-10 games, you also take away the 5-12 games or the 7-11 games.

that's why i look at the whole picture, cooney's game to game numbers are pretty volatile (although I don't have good data on that, I'd love to look at std devs). i think conference games are more meaningful.

joseph patterson and johnson can play a few minutes, cooney can take a few less shots. if 5 3s a game was good enough for janulis, it's good enough for cooney

i think he'll make more of them if he takes less of them

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Half is probably an exaggeration but they're certainly not coming primarily from Joseph. G might have the lions share.

I'd say it's likely G, Roberson, Joseph, and then Cooney in order. And considering Cooney is on the floor more than the rest of them, that's what makes it even more frustrating. He's really trying more lately, well in the second half last night anyway.

The color announcer last night talked about when the big man has one foot in the paint, get him the ball. If he has two feet in the paint, if you as a guard don't get him the ball, you should go sit down. I can't remember the game, but Cooney should have sat down at least twice in that game for heaving a shot when Rak had both feet in the paint, 4' from the basket, with his man completely sealed. It was really really really selfish and bad play. Especially considering how great Rak is this year. But JB never pulls Cooney for a mistake.

 

[Brooky03]

that's why i look at the whole picture, cooney's game to game numbers are pretty volatile (although I don't have good data on that, I'd love to look at std devs). i think conference games are more meaningful.

joseph patterson and johnson can play a few minutes, cooney can take a few less shots. if 5 3s a game was good enough for janulis, it's good enough for cooney

i think he'll make more of them if he takes less of them

5 3's a game from Cooney means teams pack it in the paint and Rak's effectiveness declines. Patterson could probably play a few minutes at SG, but that means G has to be at PG and BJ has to be in the game at SF; we can't have Joseph and Patterson in the game at the same time because that limits us to just 3 possible scorers. BJ at SF, G at SG, and Joseph or Patterson at PG is a lineup I can get behind. it would require BJ to play strong enough defense to stay on the court though, and it also wouldn't get rid of the 'player shooting too many 3's' problem.

Again, limiting Cooney's 3's to 5 or so per game also means we're taking away the games where he shoots near 40% at a high volume. I know these games aren't common for him, but they're not ultra rare either. You could argue that he should keep shooting if he makes 3's early, but what about the games where he misses his first 4 but hits or could hit his next 3? Sure, he could miss the next 3, but you'd never know. It's a tradeoff. He's in there to shoot and Boeheim trusts his ability to shoot. That's enough for me.

Another factor that's not being considered, is that Cooney puts up this many shots in essentially 40 whole minutes of play. I'd say it's a safe bet that we can knock down his average 3pt attempts by 1.5 or 2 per game, scaling it to the amount of PT most starting SG's see.

 

[Millhouse]

5 3's a game from Cooney means teams pack it in the paint and Rak's effectiveness declines. Patterson could probably play a few minutes at SG, but that means G has to be at PG and BJ has to be in the game at SF; we can't have Joseph and Patterson in the game at the same time because that limits us to just 3 possible scorers. BJ at SF, G at SG, and Joseph or Patterson at PG is a lineup I can get behind. it would require BJ to play strong enough defense to stay on the court though, and it also wouldn't get rid of the 'player shooting too many 3's' problem.

Again, limiting Cooney's 3's to 5 or so per game also means we're taking away the games where he shoots near 40% at a high volume. I know these games aren't common for him, but they're not ultra rare either. You could argue that he should keep shooting if he makes 3's early, but what about the games where he misses his first 4 but hits or could hit his next 3? Sure, he could miss the next 3, but you'd never know. It's a tradeoff. He's in there to shoot and Boeheim trusts his ability to shoot. That's enough for me.

Another factor that's not being considered, is that Cooney puts up this many shots in essentially 40 whole minutes of play. I'd say it's a safe bet that we can knock down his average 3pt attempts by 1.5 or 2 per game, scaling it to the amount of PT most starting SG's see.

i think this is hooey. people still guarded janulis

 

[OttoinGrotto]

5 3's a game from Cooney means teams pack it in the paint and Rak's effectiveness declines. Patterson could probably play a few minutes at SG, but that means G has to be at PG and BJ has to be in the game at SF; we can't have Joseph and Patterson in the game at the same time because that limits us to just 3 possible scorers. BJ at SF, G at SG, and Joseph or Patterson at PG is a lineup I can get behind. it would require BJ to play strong enough defense to stay on the court though, and it also wouldn't get rid of the 'player shooting too many 3's' problem.

Again, limiting Cooney's 3's to 5 or so per game also means we're taking away the games where he shoots near 40% at a high volume. I know these games aren't common for him, but they're not ultra rare either. You could argue that he should keep shooting if he makes 3's early, but what about the games where he misses his first 4 but hits or could hit his next 3? Sure, he could miss the next 3, but you'd never know. It's a tradeoff. He's in there to shoot and Boeheim trusts his ability to shoot. That's enough for me.

Another factor that's not being considered, is that Cooney puts up this many shots in essentially 40 whole minutes of play. I'd say it's a safe bet that we can knock down his average 3pt attempts by 1.5 or 2 per game, scaling it to the amount of PT most starting SG's see.

This argument supposed that Cooney needs to take bad shots in order to be respected as an outside shooting threat.

 

[AlaskaSU]

My problem with Cooney is that when his shot is off he typically does not do anything else on offense. If he is being face guarded he should be able to drive and then make good things happen off the drive: pass, draw a foul, pull up jumper, anything, but he focuses on 3 point shooting too much without adjusting to the game and his play. His offense is too one dimensional for someone that is both unreliable and lacks the ability to be clutch. What is frustrating is that he has the skill and strength to be more than what he is.

 

[Millhouse]

This argument supposed that Cooney needs to take bad shots in order to be respected as an outside shooting threat.

even if it were true, that work has already been done! let's start reaping the benefits

 

[Cusefan0307]

No. Stats from our early games against Sister Mary's Children of the Poor U. shouldn't be included in determining a player's effectiveness.

Except there really is no correlation of him playing better against worse teams. He was 1-5 against Loyola, 0-4 against Holy Cross, and 2-7 against Hampton. The only decent game from three he had against the cupcakes was Colgate. That's why i don't totally agree with Milly's statistical analysis. This is not 2006. We are not playing 13 cupcakes this year.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Except there really is no correlation of him playing better against worse teams. He was 1-5 against Loyola, 0-4 against Holy Cross, and 2-7 against Hampton. The only decent game from three he had against the cupcakes was Colgate. That's why i don't totally agree with Milly's statistical analysis. This is not 2006. We are not playing 13 cupcakes this year.

Fair point. But I guess the point milly is making is that's really where comparison is valid, when you are in the teeth of your schedule. Unless of course you are comparing Kentucky numbers. SEC is cupcake-ville baby!

 

[NineOneSeven]

Am I the only one who thinks limiting the stats to just conference play is arbitrary?

Better competition. More wear and tear on body when you play every minute all year.

Makes sense to me.

 

[Millhouse]

Except there really is no correlation of him playing better against worse teams. He was 1-5 against Loyola, 0-4 against Holy Cross, and 2-7 against Hampton. The only decent game from three he had against the cupcakes was Colgate. That's why i don't totally agree with Milly's statistical analysis. This is not 2006. We are not playing 13 cupcakes this year.

i picked conference games because they matter more. i wasn't cherry picking because it's not like he was great before ACC play

some players play brutal non conference schedules to make money, other players play weak, others play in between. the tournament committee looks at conference record, it's not just me that thinks those games are more important.

i just don't want to treat kennesaw state like VT even though they both suck because the VT is more important

 

[Cusefan0307]

i picked conference games because they matter more. i wasn't cherry picking because it's not like he was great before ACC play

some players play brutal non conference schedules to make money, other players play weak, others play in between. the tournament committee looks at conference record, it's not just me that thinks those games are more important.

i just don't want to treat kennesaw state like VT even though they both suck because the VT is more important

Agree to disagree, and I'm going to hijack the thread, but maybe for whatever statistical analysis comparison from x years ago I can see, but I don't think conference games are more important anymore, especially with unbalanced schedules. If we won against Villanova and weren't banned we'd be a tourney team right now. Because we didn't we are a fake bubble team. Wins at Nova and Michigan would of been better than 2 wins on the road against BC and VPI.

 

[Millhouse]

Anywayyyy...surprised no one's talking about Pitino's comments on Christmas and the NCAA investigation. He's basically validating what some folks on here have been saying---that he's better suited to PF in the league and has played himself into the first round with his improvement this year. Pitino thinks he's the best low-post scorer in the country. Debatable but not ludicrous. That in itself tells you how far he's come. I liked his explanation for Rak's play in the Duke game too (didn't get the calls he should have). On the investigation, he's on the money too. No reason it should take just under a decade to determine penalties.

PUT THAT IN THE CHRISTMAS THREAD, BROKEN RECORD!

 

[Millhouse]

PUT THAT IN THE CHRISTMAS THREAD, BROKEN RECORD!

supp you know I was kidding right?

 

[supp]

supp you know I was kidding right?

Had too many tabs open but you're right, it was a good bit of snark (albeit unintentional) and I should have left it.

 

[RF2044]

PUT THAT IN THE CHRISTMAS THREAD, BROKEN RECORD!

I look forward to the 8 more threads over analyzing Cooney that we can look forward to before the end of the week from the Department of Redundancy Department.

 

[Millhouse]

Here's a comparable player that I've never watched

Ray Gallegos Nebraska

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/ray-gallegos-1.html

in conference, played 39 minutes as a junior, shot 9 3s per game, made 29.5% of them

Senior year, 29 MPG in conference, shot only 5 3s per game, (unfortunately) made 29.5% of them again

nebraska was 15-18 his junior year and 19-13 the following year

the other guy that comes up in these queries is Jherrod Stiggers. As far as I know, his name is real and not from Key & Peele East West All Stars. His shots went from 7 per game to 9 and his % plummeted

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/jherrod-stiggers-1.html

 

[RF2044]

Here's a comparable player that I've never watched

Ray Gallegos Nebraska

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/ray-gallegos-1.html

in conference, played 39 minutes as a junior, shot 9 3s per game, made 29.5% of them

Senior year, 29 MPG in conference, shot only 5 3s per game, (unfortunately) made 29.5% of them again

nebraska was 15-18 his junior year and 19-13 the following year

Isn't that this guy?

 

[moqui]

Coach has a radio show tonight - you should make time for it. Why waste all your analysis here in the peanut gallery when the only guy who can do anything meaningful with it will be taking calls?

 

[Millhouse]

Coach has a radio show tonight - you should make time for it. Why waste all your analysis here in the peanut gallery when the only guy who can do anything meaningful with it will be taking calls?

is it ok with you that I compared him to everyone that plays basketball in college? maybe everyone else is also a cancer

 

[moqui]

is it ok with you that I compared him to everyone that plays basketball in college? maybe everyone else is also a cancer

I have no problem with critiquing Cooney, he deserves it and I won't make excuses for him. But you were not simply critiquing his game when you made that thread and you know it, though you'll never admit it.

but that's all a non sequitor - respond to my point: why don't you take your analyses to the Man himself? his radio show is a much better forum than this board. and its just as anonymous. you should do it; JB's response would either be informative or entertaining, maybe both.

 

[Millhouse]

I have no problem with critiquing Cooney, he deserves it and I won't make excuses for him. But you were not simply critiquing his game when you made that thread and you know it, though you'll never admit it.

but that's all a non sequitor - respond to my point: why don't you take your analyses to the Man himself? his radio show is a much better forum than this board. and its just as anonymous. you should do it; JB's response would either be informative or entertaining, maybe both.

your point is stupid. we're all here to talk basketball. except for you. you're here to bite ankles. none of us thinks any of this actually affects anything