olemike59

Standout [340]

TigerPulse: 73%

Posts: 3171

Joined: 6/12/20

Stark Raving Brad - Fixing the stupid. Dec. 3rd

Dec 3, 2023, 9:28 PM

Opponent: Pitt

On November 29th, in the wake of the Basketball team’s win over Alabama, I poked the bear of the Brownell Bros. by pointing out they had done little to analyze the win over the Tide. They had, as usual, stroked the egos a good bit, but substantive commentary about the game seemed to have eluded them.

Importantly, I pointed out that for two straight games we had shot >50% on three’s, and in the win over Bama, had limited ourselves to only 21 three’s for the whole game. Finally, I pointed out that our game where we shot the most 3-pointers, we also had our lowest point total scored for the season (Davidson, 31 three’s, 68 points). The summation of this isn’t hard: this team is going to be demonstrably better when it takes good shots in the extreme. This isn’t new for Brownell coached teams in any way....

Toward the end, I also stated this, “Case in point: last night at 4:38 left and the lead down to 7, and again at 3:04 left and the lead at 6, Chase Hunter hits two key 3-pointers. Great; love that he hit them.

But those are two critical points late in an Away game against a good defensive opponent. And the best Clemson can do is let a kid who shot 36% from 3 last year while starting {at PG} jerk up two three's?

They escaped the percentages last night. Play that game all year and it will catch up to them.”

Boy, did that strike a nerve. The “best” comment I got back went something like, “Big game players make big game shots.” LOFL....

No.... 36% shooters will shoot 36% over time regardless the clock or the personal will.

Well, I hate to say, “I told you so”, but seriously, something has to give. Brownell: c’mon man....

So, there we are in the very next game after Bama, and we’re trying to put Pitt away. From 16:20 until 7:33, the lead never goes under 9 points. This is great game control. But then Pitt beings to make a move, and the home crowd, never to be underestimated, starts to warm to the task. A three gets Pitt to within 6. Back and forth for the next three minutes with the lead between 6 and 9, until at 4:25 Pitt hits another 3 to cut the lead to 4.

This is Massey’s #79 team we’re playing, not Bama. Pitt hasn’t beaten anyone ranked higher than #135, and got punked by #61 Florida by 15. IF you want to be a good, non-bubble NCAA team, you’ve got to beat these teams routinely. So, when you find your lead trimmed to 4 on some else’s home court with 4 minutes to go, you MUST get good shots. That’s all there is to it, or indeed, you’ll be inconsistent as heck, and lose games you shouldn’t.

So, what did we do while up 4 with 4 to play? Well, there’s good ol’ Chase Hunter clanking a 3 with 4:19 to play almost exactly like at Bama except the ball doesn’t go in. Pitt gets the Defensive rebound and ultimately cuts the lead to 2 without us ever getting the ball back. It’s now 70-68 with 3:41 to play.

Over the next minute Ian Scheiffelin makes a couple of plays, one on a nice assist from Hunter, and the lead is 6 at 2:32 on the clock. We’ve started to reassert here, and PJ Hall makes a nice steal, but then with 2:14 to play there’s Hunter firing the cannons again from deep. He again misses, and Pitt will ultimately get an open look at a 3 that could have cut the lead in half back to 3 again. If you keep giving home teams a look at a Win, they’ll ultimately find it.

Indeed, these are the times that try men’s souls, and this is critical to learn: Brownell’s teams historically lose tight games because of bad shot selection; Brownell’s teams historically go on prolonged scoring droughts because of bad shot selection; Brownell’s teams cough up huge leads in big games because of bad shot selection; and Brownell’s teams lose to bad teams often because of bad shot selection.

Just think of Brownell’s two best teams, 2011 and 2018, and you see that his best teams had a ready-made Floor General to run the offense apporpriately. In those cases, Demontez Stitt and a relatively healthy Shelton Mitchell. Those guys were “coaches on the floor”, which is exactly what Brownell needs.

On the other side of the coin, go back and watch the Morehead State game last year after we went up 15 in the first half. The MSU Eagles were little more than preview of the first 4 minutes against Davidson this year, as the Wildcats raced away, 17 to 2.

It is what it is. The team put a game at risk against a mediocre Pitt team because it wasted a multitude of offensive possessions during the game chucking 30 three’s. They had only taken 21 three’s in a historic win against Bama, but then they come back and chuck 17 three’s in the 1st half alone against Pitt. Laughably, Clemson led for 34 and a half minutes of the game, and by as much as 15, yet the lead was only 2 with 3 and a half to play.

Worse; players not named Hall or Girard shot 2 for 15 from three on the game, with Hunter being 0 for 5 by himself.

Lesson? 36% shooters are indeed only that, and when you need points, you need better odds if you want to consistently close games out. Somewhere along the way, for this “most talented team”, someone’s going to have to take control. Coaches?

Welcome to Stark Raving Brad.....

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

over some number of possessions. But here , I’m not talking averages over games, I’m talking a one possession choice. It’s late game, and you need points most of all. If you knew how many points you needed to win, and the number of likely possessions left, then you could calculate the efficiency you needed to get there. But all you know is that they’re trying to catch you. So what you need is the thing that guarantees points, or the closest thing to it.

The short of it is that if your opponent makes every three while you make every two, they only gain one point on you each trip. Their three is only worth 1 point. If the lead is 10, then they need 10 possessions to catch you. If there’s only 2 minutes left, they’re going to only get maybe 3 possessions, and thus they’ll fall 7 possessions short.

But if you don’t score points on your trips, their three’s are worth the full 3 points, and they only actually need a little over 3 trips to catch you, not the original 10.

So You don’t need efficient average, you need the best guarantee of points in the now. They aren’t fully dissimilar, but they aren’t the same either.

Stark Raving Brad - Fixing the stupid. Dec. 3rd

Re: Stark Raving Brad - Fixing the stupid. Dec. 3rd

Fix your thinking, and that would help..

Why should I be positive about shooting 30 three's?

The end result Tigers won

Offense looks a little better than before

Re: Stark Raving Brad - Fixing the stupid. Dec. 3rd

Re: Stark Raving Brad - Fixing the stupid. Dec. 3rd

You have a really elevated and delusional view of yourself.

If anyone was curious I think O'high/ho-Mike is

Re: If anyone was curious I think O'high/ho-Mike is

Yes, all of that is correct.***

Did Brad do anything well?

Welcome to Stark raving-skeerd.

Just FYI, as you say - I gave four reasons that this issue is more important

Re: Stark Raving Brad - Fixing the stupid. Dec. 3rd

Good win Tigers!

Re: Stark Raving Brad - Fixing the stupid. Dec. 3rd

No one argues that threes can have a greater efficiency

Re: Stark Raving Brad - Fixing the stupid. Dec. 3rd

No, I am quite happy not being in the Brad Brownell

Re: No, I am quite happy not being in the Brad Brownell

I'll answer you tonight with the next post

Re: Stark Raving Brad - Fixing the stupid. Dec. 3rd

Re: Stark Raving Brad - Fixing the stupid. Dec. 3rd

Re: Stark Raving Brad - Fixing the stupid. Dec. 3rd

I respect the opinion but I think you are conflating

Re: Stark Raving Brad - Fixing the stupid. Dec. 3rd

Re: Stark Raving Brad - Fixing the stupid. Dec. 3rd

You snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, twice?

and yet last year's team was effectively out of the NCAAT by Christmas

I agree with a lot of what you write

Re: I agree with a lot of what you write

Re: I agree with a lot of what you write

TigerBoard POTD