194th in 3 point shooting at present

[uk78_rivals88018]

These 5 star ratings systems must be really wacky or not having one player take most of the outside shots like Seton Hall might have some impact. Their star couldn't hit even free throws the first half but kept on shooting and then found his touch.

I struggle with how Herro can't hit shots now and again question why the coaching staff made him adjust his release.

In any event, how can our highly rated guards be so bad. 194th out of all the college programs?????

 

[englishmajor]

Nice shootin, Tex

 

[Burly]

Herro shooting 55% from 2 point range and 90% from line - he's fading on everything right now - hopefully a staff member sees it.

 

[AltminIC]

A game against Carolina and Roy Williams’ Defense is the panacea for 3-point shooting problems.

 

[UK90]

Maybe we should play our best three point shooter.

We have four guards. Three have awful three point percentages. One has a really good three point percentage. Guess which one is getting the fewest minutes?

 

[Bluesnky]

If my math is correct, the difference between this team shooting 34% and 39% is about .82 made three pointers per game. But, yeah. The guards need to shoot it better. Given the way PJ and Reid Travis have shot the deep ball we might really be onto something if Quickley and Herro figure it out.

But the main problem with this team right now is the defense, especially the poor defensive performance of the bench.

 

[CatTendencies]

Maybe we should play our best three point shooter.

We have four guards. Three have awful three point percentages. One has a really good three point percentage. Guess which one is getting the fewest minutes?

Posters on here hate this notion, but Cal has never placed emphasis on three point shooting. Has he recruited shooters? Yes. But his bread and butter is big, strong, fast, athletic guys that will drive it to the basket and throw it at the rim and hope to score, get fouled, or both.

I've never seen a collective group of players on a team be so intent on just forcing the ball to the rim regardless of the defense or situation. So often I find myself saying that if they would just hold out for a split second they could find an open man for an easy lay-up or dunk. But no. They get a steal or get on the break and they just put their head down and drive the **** out of it hoping to get a foul.

Cal teaches this.

 

[bluegrasshickory]

is that bad?

 

[Col. Angus]

when your coach doesn't value the 3 point shot or run sets to get shooters open, the team is gonna be ranked near the bottom in the nation in 3 point attempts. Never mind makes. We're talking ATTEMPTS.

Cal said this team should be the best 3 point shooting team he's ever coached. Would think they'd be ranked better than near the very bottom in the country in 3 point attempts.

 

[Aike]

I don’t think this is that big of a deal. We are 20th in true shooting percentage, so we’re putting the ball in the basket in an efficient manner. The bigger problem is how we’re defending the three point line.

That being said, we’ve put up those shooting numbers vs. a pretty weak schedule, so we will need to step up.

 

[Bluesnky]

I don’t think this is that big of a deal. We are 20th in true shooting percentage, so we’re putting the ball in the basket in an efficient manner. The bigger problem is how we’re defending the three point line.

That being said, we’ve put up those shooting numbers vs. a pretty weak schedule, so we will need to step up.

This site is filled with interior decorators who think they are architects. All the complaints are about style rather than effectiveness. Seriously, there are a million more complaints on here about our very good offense than our very poor defense.

 

[Joneslab]

I don’t think this is that big of a deal. We are 20th in true shooting percentage, so we’re putting the ball in the basket in an efficient manner. The bigger problem is how we’re defending the three point line.

Agree about the defense, but three point shooting is definitely a big deal.

Mostly because of the psychological grenade a three point shot is. Think about Herro's final five threes the other day: if he hits any of those five, we obviously win that game. The first one he missed was critical because it would've extended our lead and may have knocked Seton Hall down.

I watch games all the time where a three just takes the life out of a team. You can't understate how important it is. When you've got clankers out there you can score in the post and get to the foul line, but whiffing on shot after shot from three gives teams hope--particularly if they are hitting threes, which all our opponents do.

 

[Cats192]

I'm sure it'll work out as the season progresses, and as the shots fall--maybe we're a much better team. But I'm honestly much more worried about how bad we are at guarding the 3.

 

[Aike]

Agree about the defense, but three point shooting is definitely a big deal.

Mostly because of the psychological grenade a three point shot is. Think about Herro's final five threes the other day: if he hits any of those five, we obviously win that game. The first one he missed was critical because it would've extended our lead and may have knocked Seton Hall down.

I watch games all the time where a three just takes the life out of a team. You can't understate how important it is. When you've got clankers out there you can score in the post and get to the foul line, but whiffing on shot after shot from three gives teams hope--particularly if they are hitting threes, which all our opponents do.

Respectfully, I’ve run a lot of numbers on this and three point rate doesn’t have the impact you think it does. It’s emotional.

Your last paragraph gets to the heart of the matter though - us missing them while the other team hits them makes for a long night.

 

[Joneslab]

Respectfully, I’ve run a lot of numbers on this and three point rate doesn’t have the impact you think it does. It’s emotional.

Basketball is an emotional sport.

It doesn't fit neatly into statistical analyses as baseball does. Basketball has a lot of stuff happen in it that occurs outside statistical measures. This is why the NCAA Tournament is usually so crazy and why you have this deluge of upsets that happen in the game.

I won't say statistics are useless, but the move toward these analyses and so on in this game are going to prove to be next to useless as we go on. The game is just so strange in so many ways. You will never see a moneyball style hack in college basketball. Maybe, maybe, in the NBA. But never in college.

If you can't hit threes in this game, you might as well pack it up and stop playing. They're that important. If you can't stop threes, that's worse--and obviously Kentucky can't do either well at a high level. But particularly with young teams, emotion factors heavily into how games are played. Of course we could be a well-tuned machine statistically and it would counteract how fragile we are, but we're not.

I'm still convinced that at some point Kentucky will shoot the ball, but right now we're not.

 

[mjj_2K]

This site is filled with interior decorators who think they are architects. All the complaints are about style rather than effectiveness. Seriously, there are a million more complaints on here about our very good offense than our very poor defense.

Some truth to that.

But how can anyone feel good about the offense when we just watched a game where UK went into halftime up 6 despite shooting 9/28? It's pretty hard not to think that if UK could have just hit a few more shots, they would have had more than enough cushion to win the game no matter how hot a Seton Hall player was.

BTW, UK's defensive struggles coincide with the 30 second shotclock and emphasis on reducing allowable defensive contact. Maybe it's a coincidence, maybe not. It seems rare nowadays for teams (other than UK) to play anything but 4 or even 5 out, and that puts a ton of pressure on a defense that is constantly switching.

 

[Bluesnky]

I'm sure it'll work out as the season progresses, and as the shots fall--maybe we're a much better team. But I'm honestly much more worried about how bad we are at guarding the 3.

We’ve done a poor job of guarding it most of the year, but SH was 4-19 from 3 until the 5:30 mark of the second half, before hitting their next seven attempts. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen anything like it. And I would say 5 or 6 of those last 7 were very well defended.

You are going to run into bad luck sometimes where everything your opponent throws up goes through the net. Nothing you can do about that. But what killed us on Saturday was the stretch from about 18:00-10:00 in the second half, when we kept giving up straight line drives to the basket. I think a lot of that can be attributed to poor play from guys coming off the bench.

 

[Joneslab]

We’ve done a poor job of guarding it most of the year, but SH was 4-19 from 3 until the 5:30 mark of the second half, before hitting their next seven attempts. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen anything like it. And I would say 5 or 6 of those last 7 were very well defended.

The problem with this is that it reminded you of what other teams have done, starting with Duke.

Bubba Parham did it. Southern Illinois hit 13-28. The kid from Greensboro did it in the first half. Seton Hall unfortunately started late.

We can't stop the bleeding when it starts. We allow some clean looks, and what happens at that point is that guys start playing above their heads. It's that emotion again: everybody who's watched the game has seen guys go off, and they usually do it against soft teams that take no pride in guarding anyone.

When you give guys at this level hope, they'll gut you every time. Kentucky is soft.

 

[Aike]

Basketball is an emotional sport.

It doesn't fit neatly into statistical analyses as baseball does. Basketball has a lot of stuff happen in it that occurs outside statistical measures. This is why the NCAA Tournament is usually so crazy and why you have this deluge of upsets that happen in the game.

I won't say statistics are useless, but the move toward these analyses and so on in this game are going to prove to be next to useless as we go on. The game is just so strange in so many ways. You will never see a moneyball style hack in college basketball. Maybe, maybe, in the NBA. But never in college.

If you can't hit threes in this game, you might as well pack it up and stop playing. They're that important. If you can't stop threes, that's worse--and obviously Kentucky can't do either well at a high level. But particularly with young teams, emotion factors heavily into how games are played. Of course we could be a well-tuned machine statistically and it would counteract how fragile we are, but we're not.

I'm still convinced that at some point Kentucky will shoot the ball, but right now we're not.

You can be kind of a middling team as far as shooting threes and be fine. UNC was exactly that in 2017.

You can’t be that and also get blitzed from three by your opponent. Which is exactly what is happening to us right now.

You can believe me or not believe me, but I can assure you that there are many more variables far more relevant to your success as a team than how you shoot the three. The problem is trading 2s for 3s, or 0s for 3s, as the case may be.

I understand that basketball is an emotional game. I’ve played and watched my fair share. In a given game, one hot player can wreck all of the metrics. That’s why you play the games, and why it’s so much fun.

But as random as the NCAA tournament is, you can still be about 75% sure who is going to win each game, based on the numbers. They will never be able to tell the whole truth, but they don’t lie either.

 

[Chuckinden]

Hitting threes opens up the interior game and vis-a-vis., but I do agree that hitting threes consistently takes the wind out of opponents sails.

 

[Bluesnky]

The problem with this is that it reminded you of what other teams have done, starting with Duke.

Bubba Parham did it. Southern Illinois hit 13-28. The kid from Greensboro did it in the first half. Seton Hall unfortunately started late.

We can't stop the bleeding when it starts. We allow some clean looks, and what happens at that point is that guys start playing above their heads. It's that emotion again: everybody who's watched the game has seen guys go off, and they usually do it against soft teams that take no pride in guarding anyone.

When you give guys at this level hope, they'll gut you every time. Kentucky is soft.

Those guys went off in part because we were doing a poor job of guarding them. We guarded SH and they still hit them. It was a low probability performance. A one percenter. Kentucky could survive it if they didn’t give up all those easy points on straight line drives during that one stretch.

 

[Bluesnky]

Hitting threes opens up the interior game and vis-a-vis., but I do agree that hitting threes consistently takes the wind out of opponents sails.

We’d be a top 5 offense if our guards could hit threes. As it is we are top 20-ish. The defense is probably in the bottom half among high majors.

 

[TomTraubertsBlues]

I understand the tendency to boil it down to one or even two things, but there is so much that needs improvement with this team. Cal has made some great turnarounds before, but IMO he really has his hands full with this group. I'll be ecstatic to be wrong, but I just don't see it this year. I see a minimum of 11 losses and a ceiling of Sweet 16.

 

[TortElvisII]

We are taking 320th or so most 3's.

 

[LadyCaytIL]

PJ went off just as much as the SH team did. and we still lost.

in a normal game... we lose by 10 or so if the SH kid goes off like that.... and a normal game we win by 10 plus with PJ going off like that. both happened in the same game and we STILL LOST

 

[playmorezeppelin_rivals181042]

Offense isn't taught until February.