More good news!?

[Norm Peterson]

For those who were worried about Jack McVeigh (a 34% shooter from deep on the year last year) taking on a more significant role in the absence of Andrew White (a 41% shooter from deep), I have good news for you.

 

Let's say if you're getting starters minutes, or at least primary rotation-type minutes, then you're playing at least half of the game.

 

Let's look at what Jack McVeigh did in games where he played at least 20 minutes vs. games where he played less than 20 minutes.

 

In games where Jack McVeigh played at least 20 minutes, he shot 44.6% from deep.

In games where Jack McVeigh played fewer than 20 minutes, he shot only 24.5% from deep.

 

In the games where Jack didn't play much, it wasn't that he was being pulled for missing shots, either, so you can't say, well, it's obvious he was getting pulled when he wasn't shooting well.  That's not what happened.

 

My takeaway from this is that Jack McVeigh rises to the occasion.  He had his absolute best stretch when he was inserted into the starting lineup when Shavon got hurt and he averaged 29 minutes, 11 points, and 47.8% from deep.

 

I think now that Andrew is gone, Jack is the presumptive starter at the wing.  I know he's been working on his shooting this summer and I, for one, am really looking forward to seeing what he can do this coming season.

[Swan88]

For those who were worried about Jack McVeigh (a 34% shooter from deep on the year last year) taking on a more significant role in the absence of Andrew White (a 41% shooter from deep), I have good news for you.

 

Let's say if you're getting starters minutes, or at least primary rotation-type minutes, then you're playing at least half of the game.

 

Let's look at what Jack McVeigh did in games where he played at least 20 minutes vs. games where he played less than 20 minutes.

 

In games where Jack McVeigh played at least 20 minutes, he shot 44.6% from deep.

In games where Jack McVeigh played fewer than 20 minutes, he shot only 24.5% from deep.

 

In the games where Jack didn't play much, it wasn't that he was being pulled for missing shots, either, so you can't say, well, it's obvious he was getting pulled when he wasn't shooting well.  That's not what happened.

 

My takeaway from this is that Jack McVeigh rises to the occasion.  He had his absolute best stretch when he was inserted into the starting lineup when Shavon got hurt and he averaged 29 minutes, 11 points, and 47.8% from deep.

 

I think now that Andrew is gone, Jack is the presumptive starter at the wing.  I know he's been working on his shooting this summer and I, for one, am really looking forward to seeing what he can do this coming season.

Wow, Norm! Great job on research and analysis. Gotta' love your conclusions!

[HuskerFever]

In the games where Jack didn't play much, it wasn't that he was being pulled for missing shots, either, so you can't say, well, it's obvious he was getting pulled when he wasn't shooting well.  That's not what happened.

 

I'm curious to see which games that Jack was playing 20+ minutes versus 20- minutes. There's a hypothesis that could say that he plays longer in games against lesser opponents and has better looks from three again them. Of course, we'd have to look at the data.

[khoock]

In the games where Jack didn't play much, it wasn't that he was being pulled for missing shots, either, so you can't say, well, it's obvious he was getting pulled when he wasn't shooting well. That's not what happened.

I'm curious to see which games that Jack was playing 20+ minutes versus 20- minutes. There's a hypothesis that could say that he plays longer in games against lesser opponents and has better looks from three again them. Of course, we'd have to look at the data.

Wisconsin, Indiana 2x, Ohio State, Penn State, Cincinnati, and some scrubs.

[khoock]

Jack also had quite a few game where he played 18-19 minutes but I did not include those.

[Norm Peterson]

Jack also had quite a few game where he played 18-19 minutes but I did not include those.

 

I used 20 minutes as sort of an arbitrary cutoff.  Nice round number that seemed to differentiate a player who's playing bench minutes versus someone starting or in the primary rotation.

 

Seems Jack played 10 games with 20 or more minutes.  Seven of those games were in-conference games and one of the non-conference 20+ minutes games was against a ranked Cinci team. 

 

So, 8 out of his 10 20+-minute games -- the games in which he shot the best -- were against solid competition. 

[Dead Dog Alley]

In the four games McVeigh was in double figures, he was 15-24 from 3.

In the ten games he scored more than 8, he was 25-46.

In the remaining 24 games, which included a 2-3 effort vs. Cincinnati, he was 9-54.

 

After going for 17 and 16 against Indiana and Ohio State when Shavon Shields was out, he scored 3 points total in the last six games when Shields came back, going 1-16 from the field and 1-9 from 3.

[Norm Peterson]

In the four games McVeigh was in double figures, he was 15-24 from 3.

In the ten games he scored more than 8, he was 25-46.

In the remaining 24 games, which included a 2-3 effort vs. Cincinnati, he was 9-54.

 

After going for 17 and 16 against Indiana and Ohio State when Shavon Shields was out, he scored 3 points total in the last six games when Shields came back, going 1-16 from the field and 1-9 from 3.

 

A lot of those 24 games where he was cold, though, he was coming in for very few minutes and going 0-1 or 0-2 from three.  So, he didn't take a high volume of shots in those games but the numbers of misses added up over time.

 

Therefore, I would still argue that Jack was a kid who, as a freshman, needed to be in the flow of the game and getting minutes to get into his shooting rhythm.  He might come in and miss his first couple of shots and then hit the next 3.

 

As I demonstrated extremely clearly above (a 20 percentage point swing is tough to ignore), the more minutes he got, the better he shot.

[Red Don]

I'm not sure how germane this is to the original premise, i.e. the more minutes Jack plays the better he shoots, but I was under the impression that Jack's minutes were limited more due to a lack of defensive skills rather than poor offensive output.

 

If this is the case wouldn't it suggest he'd be better off emphasizing his defensive skills so as to stay in the game, with an additional benefit being his shooting also tends to get better?

 

It may be moot anyway in that Jack may get additional playing time regardless because we need scorers to replace AW-III and Shavon.  I'm like Norm, I'd like to see Jack 'rise to the occasion.'

[Huskerpapa]

I do not worry about Jack on the offensive end.  He is going to be stronger and have a better understanding of the American game.  He will score and he likely will create match-up nightmares for many opposing coaches.

 

What I worry about with Jack (and yes - Glynn) is his adjustment on defense.  At times last year, Jack and Glynn were (at best) lost on defense.  They were often left in the dust when the player they were guarding made a move.  The difference this year is that we may have an eraser behind them. 

 

I am hoping that they will both improve their defense in addition to having that eraser behind them.

[Norm Peterson]

The year of experience is going to definitely help.  For Jack, his length is such an asset, it can mask some of his deficiency in lateral quickness (which a summer in the weight room might also help with.)

[atskooc]

The better Jack rebounds, the more he plays.

On more than one occasion Jack was pulled for failing to box out, got his ass chewed, and did not return (I remember the Miami game specifically).

[khoock]

I think Jack will be a really good rebounder once he adjusts to the physicality of D1 ball and gets stronger. He was a good rebounder coming out of high school and was good on the Spain trip. He has the wingspan for it.

[AuroranHusker]

I like how Normy made a new thread with 'good' in the title to compact the ill-fated "bad news" that wasn't bad. 

[HuskerFever]

I like how Normy made a new thread with 'good' in the title to compact the ill-fated "bad news" that wasn't bad. 

 

I'm still waiting for the "More okay news" thread to come out.

[Norm Peterson]

I'm not sure how germane this is to the original premise, i.e. the more minutes Jack plays the better he shoots, but I was under the impression that Jack's minutes were limited more due to a lack of defensive skills rather than poor offensive output.

 

If this is the case wouldn't it suggest he'd be better off emphasizing his defensive skills so as to stay in the game, with an additional benefit being his shooting also tends to get better?

 

It may be moot anyway in that Jack may get additional playing time regardless because we need scorers to replace AW-III and Shavon.  I'm like Norm, I'd like to see Jack 'rise to the occasion.'

 

That's what she said?

[colhusker]

 

I'm not sure how germane this is to the original premise, i.e. the more minutes Jack plays the better he shoots, but I was under the impression that Jack's minutes were limited more due to a lack of defensive skills rather than poor offensive output.

 

If this is the case wouldn't it suggest he'd be better off emphasizing his defensive skills so as to stay in the game, with an additional benefit being his shooting also tends to get better?

 

It may be moot anyway in that Jack may get additional playing time regardless because we need scorers to replace AW-III and Shavon.  I'm like Norm, I'd like to see Jack 'rise to the occasion.'

 

That's what she said?

 

Close enough!

[Red Don]

My takeaway from this is that Jack McVeigh rises to the occasion. 

 

But Norm said it First!  

[AuroranHusker]

 

I like how Normy made a new thread with 'good' in the title to compact the ill-fated "bad news" that wasn't bad. 

 

I'm still waiting for the "More okay news" thread to come out.

 

 

Red Don obliged.

[colhusker]