Go Back   BearcatTalk.com > Cincinnati Basketball > Bearcat Basketball

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-23-2019, 06:53 PM   #91
Alum2013
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,239
Alum2013 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyblade View Post
Getting 3-point shooters is easy, but it doesn't lead to winning. There are plenty of mid to low major programs that bomb away from three. When they are hitting it's great and every now and the it leads to an NCAA tournament run. But for every mid-major that makes a run in the NCAA tournament by hitting 3's, there are about 50 that shoot it well and didn't do anything (or didn't make the tournament).

Shooting 3's is a very unreliable way to win games. Look at Wofford, their best 3-point shoot couldn't hit anything and they lost to Kentucky. When you rely on 3-point shooting and can't hit it's pretty much game over. Being able to score easy points at the bucket is a much more reliable way to score.

I'm not saying our offense is great. Just that we need slashers and guys who can score at the bucket as much or more then we need 3-point shooters. If Cronin followed the refrain of just get 3-point shooters we'd end up losing quite a few more games.
I'd rather lose a few more games but make a sweet 16/elite 8 run every 5 years than win regular season and be bounced the first weekend for 7 years in a row.
Alum2013 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2019, 10:11 PM   #92
bearcat1518
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 72
bearcat1518 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyblade View Post
When you rely on 3-point shooting and can't hit it's pretty much game over..
Lol. Isn't that true for 2-pointers as well? Bearcats ranked #243 in FG percentage this year. (That's regular FG%).

No one is saying to "rely" on 3-point shooting. But let's be honest...you need to have guys that can shoot it. Especially in today's game.
bearcat1518 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2019, 06:59 AM   #93
Bcatfollower
Epic Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 2,218
Bcatfollower is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyblade View Post
Getting 3-point shooters is easy, but it doesn't lead to winning. There are plenty of mid to low major programs that bomb away from three. When they are hitting it's great and every now and the it leads to an NCAA tournament run. But for every mid-major that makes a run in the NCAA tournament by hitting 3's, there are about 50 that shoot it well and didn't do anything (or didn't make the tournament).

Shooting 3's is a very unreliable way to win games. Look at Wofford, their best 3-point shoot couldn't hit anything and they lost to Kentucky. When you rely on 3-point shooting and can't hit it's pretty much game over. Being able to score easy points at the bucket is a much more reliable way to score.

I'm not saying our offense is great. Just that we need slashers and guys who can score at the bucket as much or more then we need 3-point shooters. If Cronin followed the refrain of just get 3-point shooters we'd end up losing quite a few more games.
If you can’t shoot it makes it that much harder to get points in the paint because defense doesn’t need to respect the shot. They can just pack the lane and makes getting inside difficult.

I agree we don’t want to be wofford but a higher shooting % from outside the paint would be nice.
Bcatfollower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2019, 07:09 AM   #94
skyblade
Epic Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 1,790
skyblade is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by bearcat1518 View Post
Lol. Isn't that true for 2-pointers as well? Bearcats ranked #243 in FG percentage this year. (That's regular FG%).

No one is saying to "rely" on 3-point shooting. But let's be honest...you need to have guys that can shoot it. Especially in today's game.
You need to be able to score (although we scored enough vs Iowa, we just didn't stop them from scoring). But it doesn't have to be a bunch of sharpshooters. Guys who shoot around 35% are enough of a threat to draw the defense out.

Being one dimensional generally doesn't work out. Whether that's a team of sharpshooters or a team with a dominant big and a bunch of guards who can't shoot. Watching the tournament, it seems like the most consistent theme to winning is having slashers. They force the defense to collapse and rotate and create openings for themselves and other players.

I'm not saying we don't need better offense. Just that the refrain of we just need 3-point shooters doesn't hold true. We shoot 3's at a high enough clip to force the D out, what we don't do is get the easy shots at the rim.
skyblade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2019, 11:51 AM   #95
sedziobs
Senior Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 2,395
sedziobs is on a distinguished road
Teams with a higher 3pt percentage than us that are out:

Wofford
Fairleigh Dickinson
Colgate
Marquette
Northeastern
Georgia St
St Mary's
Montana
Abilene Christian
Gardner Webb
Mississippi St
Belmont
Bradley
North Dakota St
Yale
Iowa St
NKU
Wisconsin
Vermont
St John's
Ole Miss
Utah St
Villanova
Iona
Kansas
Murray St
Old Dominion
Maryland
Nevada

Some will say it's not fair to include bad teams, say 13-16 seeds. But I think that's exactly the point. Having good shooters doesn't necessarily translate to a good team in college. And it doesn't necessarily translate to March success. College players have limited skill sets. Players with size and quickness that can also shoot and handle the ball are going to an elite program and then the NBA.

Teams with a lower 3pt percentage than us that are still playing:
Ohio St
Florida St
Buffalo
LSU
Duke

These teams are more in the mold of what we're trying to do. Sure, we can go after pure shooters and sacrifice defense, but we'd probably end up looking like Marquette who hasn't made the sweet sixteen since 2013 and has missed the tourney altogether 4 times since then. Obviously having better shooters will make us a better team, but only if we don't sacrifice much of what makes us a good team already. That's not easy to do for teams not named Duke, Kentucky or Kansas.
sedziobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2019, 11:54 AM   #96
cincyguy13
Epic Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,633
cincyguy13 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyblade View Post
Getting 3-point shooters is easy, but it doesn't lead to winning. There are plenty of mid to low major programs that bomb away from three. When they are hitting it's great and every now and the it leads to an NCAA tournament run. But for every mid-major that makes a run in the NCAA tournament by hitting 3's, there are about 50 that shoot it well and didn't do anything (or didn't make the tournament).

Shooting 3's is a very unreliable way to win games. Look at Wofford, their best 3-point shoot couldn't hit anything and they lost to Kentucky. When you rely on 3-point shooting and can't hit it's pretty much game over. Being able to score easy points at the bucket is a much more reliable way to score.

I'm not saying our offense is great. Just that we need slashers and guys who can score at the bucket as much or more then we need 3-point shooters. If Cronin followed the refrain of just get 3-point shooters we'd end up losing quite a few more games.
Yes, you need a mixture of everything but having a couple shooters that can make shots helps the offense a lot. Opens the whole floor ups. Teams can’t help on defense. Making slashers even more dangerous.
cincyguy13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2019, 12:06 PM   #97
sedziobs
Senior Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 2,395
sedziobs is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by cincyguy13 View Post
Yes, you need a mixture of everything but having a couple shooters that can make shots helps the offense a lot. Opens the whole floor ups. Teams can’t help on defense. Making slashers even more dangerous.
We had a couple 40% three point shooters. You really need four guys that can shoot to truly open the floor up. We're going to have to get that from our forwards. There's hope for Keith, Trevor, Diarra and Scott. We'll have to see about Prince and Laquill.
sedziobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2019, 12:21 PM   #98
Alum2013
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,239
Alum2013 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by sedziobs View Post
We had a couple 40% three point shooters. You really need four guys that can shoot to truly open the floor up. We're going to have to get that from our forwards. There's hope for Keith, Trevor, Diarra and Scott. We'll have to see about Prince and Laquill.
If Cumberland was the one driving, which he pretty much always was unless Broome was on the floor, the only person he could kick to was Jennifer. Outside of Jennifer and Cumberland we had no other reliable 3pt shooters this year. One of them was pretty much always the person driving so really we only ever had 1 3pt option at a time. That's not good. We don't need 5 people sitting at the 3pt line. I don't think anyone is saying that. But when 3 of your 5 don't have to be guarded that's a problem.

There's nothing about William's form to make me think he's going to become a 35-40% 3pt shooter. Scott is the only one who looks like he might be capable of stroking it, as far as our starters. Brooks shouldn't even try to make that part of his game but 1-4 need to be guarded at the 3pt line in today's game.
Alum2013 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2019, 12:31 PM   #99
sedziobs
Senior Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 2,395
sedziobs is on a distinguished road
Right, which is why I said we need forwards that can shoot. Usually the guards are the slashers who will utilize the space created by shooters. That's why at least one of them needs to be a forward. Evans could have been that guy had he stayed.

Bad form can be corrected. The one that stands out in my mind is JaQuon Parker. He went just 3-20 his sophomore year and showed terrible form. By his senior year he made 40% on 100 attempts.
sedziobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2019, 01:39 PM   #100
sedziobs
Senior Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 2,395
sedziobs is on a distinguished road
After missing the sweet sixteen in 7 straight seasons, Rick Barnes was fired at Texas despite going to the tournament 6 times and advancing to the second round 3 times in that span. He's now going to the sweet sixteen at Tennessee. Meanwhile, Texas hired Shaka Smart and hasn't won a tournament game since.

Firing a good coach who hasn't had success in March can backfire, even if you can hire a perceived great coach like Shaka Smart.
sedziobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., - All material on this Cincinnati Bearcat discussion forum is strictly for entertainment purposes only. This site and any pages within are in no way affiliated with the University of Cincinnati. Any images, copyrights, or trademarks used on this site are used under the "Fair Use Provision" of the Copyright Act for purposes of comment, criticism, and news reporting.