3 point shooting

[uneblinstu]

Which is a lot less than the 70% he's hitting from now. He'd had two consecutive years before this of terrible shooting.

Edited November 28, 2017 by uneblinstu

[uneblinstu]

We're getting away from the point. They've been shooting it a lot better the past few games. We need that to continue.

[dustystehl]

14 minutes ago, uneblinstu said:

We're getting away from the point. They've been shooting it a lot better the past few games. We need that to continue.

 

Perhaps we're just trying to not get our hopes up!

[Norm Peterson]

23 minutes ago, uneblinstu said:

Which is a lot less than the 70% he's hitting from now. He'd had two consecutive years before this of terrible shooting.

 

I'm not sure what his 3-point stats were at the juco level.  I think he's a lot better shooter than his sophomore (and junior) year.  OK, maybe not a lot, but he's better than what he'd shown before.  You can just see he's got this fantastic (truly it is) mid-range jumper.  He gets great elevation, has near perfect balance, has a nice high release point.  If he can get the ball into the  lane, it's a shot that would be very difficult to block, like a floater for a lot of shorter guys.  If he could get to the point where he could hit that shot on a 40-45% basis, it'd be like him being 30% ish from 3-point range, which is an acceptable eFG% for him.

 

Except for his unusually high 3-pt%, which will probably revert to the mean, I think we're seeing more the real Evan Taylor this year.  On just 2-pointers, he's shooting 40.6%, which might not sound like a ton, but if he's getting into the paint, hey it's another element that opposing defenses have to account for.  And if we face zone, and he's able to find intermediate gaps in the zone and can continue hitting that mid-range shot, I mean, it's a weapon.

[uneblinstu]

Hope so. You need guys like ET to chip in if we're gonna get to where we want to go.

 

I didn't/don't want to start a fight on this topic. Just noticed we'd been shooting it better lately and need it to keep up.

[aphilso1]

1 hour ago, uneblinstu said:

I could be remembering it wrong (wouldn't be the first time...) but I thought part of what he was expected to contribute last year was the ability to hit from 3 along with his ability to get to the rim. Either way, him hitting from 3 is a welcome addition.

 

I just had this same conversation with a coworker.  He said that Gill was touted as a 3pt specialist coming in.  I remembered the opposite: that Gill was an athlete and a scorer, with average-ish long-range shooting.  Regardless of what he was supposed to be, he is a great floor spacer for us right now.  

[Huskerpapa]

Evan does not need to look for his shots, but he does need to take them when the opportunity arises.  He doesn't force much, if anything.  That is a good player to have on the floor, especially if he is hitting those shots.  By hitting those selected shots, defenses cannot not afford to leave him open, and in our offense, that is very important.

[hskr4life]

Sounds like Jack will get an opportunity against BC.  If that is the case, he really needs to take advantage.

[AuroranHusker]

27 minutes ago, hskr4life said:

Sounds like Jack will get an opportunity against BC.  If that is the case, he really needs to take advantage.

 

Yep. Jack needs to get it in gear, for sure.

[hhcmatt]

Listening to Kenya talk last night he talked about Gill along with Taylor as being the best guys on the team for fighting through screens on defense and that the shooting was a bonus.

[Red Don]

Like uneblinstu, I don't want to start an argument on the topic, but are we in danger of falling too much in love with the (capricious) three, relying on them to win games?  When they are falling, all is fine; and as someone said it needs to continue.  But, what happens when it doesn't (and it won't), and we find ourselves in the midst of one of our frequent scoring droughts?

 

I always thought hitting treys was a way to open up the scoring on the inside, by keeping the opposing team from packing the paint; and it works well when shooters are hot.  But when the shooters go 'cold,' does it work the same in reverse; i.e. a team can (mostly) ignore cold shooters and pack the paint to prevent inside scoring (and you aren't getting points from either place)?

 

Here's a quote I saw on another site I thought had a lot of truth.

Quote

*This team seems to follow a familiar pattern. A half of hot shooting followed by a half or even a whole game of stone cold shooting. This isn't that hard to understand. When shots start falling, everything seems all too easy. Bad habits are usually born when a player is so scorching hot, that he begins to feel he can do just about anything and it will go right. Once the shooters cool off, it takes them awhile to realize that the shots aren't falling and that they are going to have to "work" for their baskets. At some point, the team gets after it, the shots start to fall again and the pattern repeats itself.

 

[Dean Smith]

1 hour ago, Red Don said:

Like uneblinstu, I don't want to start an argument on the topic, but are we in danger of falling too much in love with the (capricious) three, relying on them to win games?  When they are falling, all is fine; and as someone said it needs to continue.  But, what happens when it doesn't (and it won't), and we find ourselves in the midst of one of our frequent scoring droughts?

 

I always thought hitting treys was a way to open up the scoring on the inside, by keeping the opposing team from packing the paint; and it works well when shooters are hot.  But when the shooters go 'cold,' does it work the same in reverse; i.e. a team can (mostly) ignore cold shooters and pack the paint to prevent inside scoring (and you aren't getting points from either place)?

 

Here's a quote I saw on another site I thought had a lot of truth.

 

That's what happened against St. Johns. We continued to chuck up (and that is an accurate description) threes no matter that none of them were going in.

[jason2486]

I would like to see Nana and Jack come in when teams run zone and we need to bust out of a slump. Jack from the corner would be nice to see against zone. On the other end, put our guys in zone to hide Jack and Nana's defensive deficiencies.

[AuroranHusker]

17 hours ago, jason2486 said:

I would like to see Nana and Jack come in when teams run zone and we need to bust out of a slump. Jack from the corner would be nice to see against zone. On the other end, put our guys in zone to hide Jack and Nana's defensive deficiencies.

 

Zone on D and Zonebusters at the other end. I like that notion. Let's do that.

 

 

Edited November 29, 2017 by AuroranHusker

[Huskerpapa]

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see us in that 1-3-1 zone at times.  Our length will drive certain teams insane.  That said, if played correctly, zone technique can be more difficult to master than man-to-man.  Asking Nana, who allegedly was lost earlier this year on defense, to also learn a zone may prove difficult. 

[jimmykc]

I too like the Zone.           http://journalstar.com/entertainment/books/review-everything-i-need-to-know-i-learned-in-the/article_6136ea8d-ad71-5e03-8338-384bcae85b22.html

[Norm Peterson]

15 hours ago, jason2486 said:

I would like to see Nana and Jack come in when teams run zone and we need to bust out of a slump. Jack from the corner would be nice to see against zone. On the other end, put our guys in zone to hide Jack and Nana's defensive deficiencies.

 

So far this season, neither Nana nor Jack are shooting the rock well enough to be zone busters.

 

Jack has hit 1 of 7 3-point attempts; Nana has hit 1 of 6.

[aphilso1]

1 hour ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

So far this season, neither Nana nor Jack are shooting the rock well enough to be zone busters.

 

Jack has hit 1 of 7 3-point attempts; Nana has hit 1 of 6.

 

Agreed, and neither is very surprising.  Jack's been streaky his whole career.  Seems like he's always either in the midst of a >40% hot streak or <20% cold streak; and unfortunately, the latter is more common than the former. 

I was in the minority at the time, but I've always had a feeling that Nana would struggle to shoot at the college level.  I voiced my concerns about his inefficient mechanics last year and I still think that's going to be a problem for him moving forward.

[hhcmatt]

Wanted to note that McVeigh played a lot better at the University games when he started vs when he came off the bench. I'm not advocating that we start him but he seems like a guy who plays better when he knows there will be minutes.  I don't recall if it was Miles or someone else who noted something along the lines of him playing to not make mistakes when his time is limited.

[AuroranHusker]

6 minutes ago, hhcdimes said:

Wanted to note that McVeigh played a lot better at the University games when he started vs when he came off the bench. I'm not advocating that we start him but he seems like a guy who plays better when he knows there will be minutes.  I don't recall if it was Miles or someone else who noted something along the lines of him playing to not make mistakes when his time is limited.

 

Yeah, that was Miles...

[dustystehl]

4 minutes ago, hhcdimes said:

Wanted to note that McVeigh played a lot better at the University games when he started vs when he came off the bench. I'm not advocating that we start him but he seems like a guy who plays better when he knows there will be minutes.  I don't recall if it was Miles or someone else who noted something along the lines of him playing to not make mistakes when his time is limited.

 

Meh. This is D-I basketball. The Big Ten. You have to be able to produce when you're on the court. Whether it's 35 minutes or 5 minutes, you have to be productive.

 

Jack will get that chance tonight.

[uneblinstu]

9/19, 47.4% last night. 3rd game in a row, 4th in 5 over 40%. Up to 149 in CBB. Jumped 53 spots last night.

[Husker4Life]

The 3 point shooting has been good but until we get our post players to score more than 2 points a game we will not fare well against good competition.

[uneblinstu]

11 minutes ago, Husker4Life said:

The 3 point shooting has been good but until we get our post players to score more than 2 points a game we will not fare well against good competition.

Nearly every team has a hole somewhere. If NU keeps shooting well and they keep having 4 guys hit double figures, they'll win a lot of games. We haven't had that at NU in a long time.

[Jacob Padilla]

One thing I noticed at the game last night: After jack drove for the lefty layup an got stuffed, Miles sent Copeland to check in. Next time down he knocked down a 3 and Miles pulled him back and gave Jack a couple more possessions before subbing. 

 

Miles said he wants Jack to be more aggressive than he has been. I think we saw that (to mixed results) in his minutes against BC.

 

As for Gill, I think he was always viewed as more of a scorer than a pure shooter but I do believe he had 10 3s in one game in high school (FWIW, Thomas one-upped him with 11 3s in a game at Brewster).