Trivia Question (try guessing before looking)

[lang]

I’m guessing nobody else ( besides White ).

[AuroranHusker]

Glynn Watson Jr.

AW-III

Pitch

Toney McCray

[Norm Peterson]

7 hours ago, AuroranHusker said:

Glynn Watson Jr.

AW-III

Pitch

Toney McCray

 

Glynn was one miss away from making the group. Just one miss. Dropped him below 40% by the tiniest of margins.

 

Otherwise, this is correct.

 

Three.

 

In ten years.

 

And Toney did it on just 86 attempts, so not even a high volume effort (which is why you'd forget he did it.)

[Norm Peterson]

Interestingly, so I set the limit at 50 attempts. It's an arbitrary number as mentioned before. I could have set it at 100. If I had done so, we'd have had two guys -- Pitchford and White -- who would have made the list.

 

But, lowering the requirement to 50 attempts only added 1 more guy. In ten years.

[Norm Peterson]

5 minutes ago, Bill Self's Toupee said:

 

I am hoping for a couple Cochran/Conklin type shooters on the roster now.

 

Two guys combining for nearly 150 makes? At better than a 43% clip? Yeah, I'd take it.

[Norm Peterson]

1 minute ago, Bill Self's Toupee said:

I think we would have won 20 or more games last season with that level of 3-PT production.  It's a hypothecal increase of 5 more 3s a game.. 68 ppg to 83 ppg.  That is a HUGE difference.

 

So, back to my question earlier in the thread. You take just ONE of these 4-5 guys who I think has a realistic shot at doing this 40% on 50 attempts or more, and put the on one of our past teams and how much of a boost would that have given us? I'm certain there were years that it would have made the difference for us to make the dance.

[Norm Peterson]

There were times in the Miles era where we were simply passing up open looks. The offense created the space to get off a shot but the guy getting the pass (often times Isaiah Roby) would pass on the shot and continue reversing the ball instead. Some of those possessions ended with made baskets but, as often as not, they didn't. I don't think it's far-fetched to say that one more quality shooter on that 2017 team and we'd have had on our dancing shoes. Same with 2018.

[aphilso1]

23 minutes ago, Bill Self's Toupee said:

Just my opinion... ONE Cary Cochran type 3-PT shooter ought to add 9 points a game by making 3 of 7 shots.  Lets say there would not be a drop-off on defense in this scenario.  Increasing all scores by 9 points, and you get the following... 

 

2010 - 7 more wins [26-6]

2011 - 4 more wins [16-14]

2012 - 3 more wins [18-15]

2013 - 5 more wins [23-9]

2014 - 6 more wins [19-12]

2015 - 5 more wins [21-13]

2016 - 5 more wins [17-14]

2017 - 5 more wins [27-6]

2018 - 7 more wins [26-10]

2019 - 7 more wins [14-18]

 

I see us dancing in several of these seasons.

 

 

A guy going 3-for-7 every game would only add 9 points to our total if he is replacing shots that would have gone 0-for-7.  That's a ludicrous assumption.  Instead of 0 points, the replacement value should be:

 

9 - (season avg points per shot attempt)*(7) = ???

 

I'm not going to look up and calculate our advanced team statistics, but I'd assume the points per shot hovered somewhere in the vicinity of 1.0.  So really the difference would be 2 points per game, not 9.

[aphilso1]

Putting my previous comment a different way, there's a reason why MLB stats calculate 'wins above replacement (WAR)' rather than 'wins above guy who goes 0.000 at the plate and commits 5 errors per game.'  

 

You don't assume that a replacement player is replacing complete ineptitude, you assume he is replacing average production.

[aphilso1]

4 minutes ago, Bill Self's Toupee said:

Ludicrous is a bit harsh.  However, I didn't take into account what would be subbed out of the game.

 

2 (maybe 3) PPG is a more likely increase from a better shooter.

 

EDIT:  Oh, and way to be a Debby Downer on my 1st-game-in-a-long-time euphoria, fella.  Nutz.

 

LOL, sorry if I was harsh.  You just touched on one of my big pet peeves -- bad math!

[Norm Peterson]

3 minutes ago, aphilso1 said:

 

LOL, sorry if I was harsh.  You just touched on one of my big pet peeves -- bad math!

 

If you don't like bad math, I'm not your guy.

[Red Don]

13 hours ago, aphilso1 said:

 

LOL, sorry if I was harsh.  You just touched on one of my big pet peeves -- bad math!

 

And here all this time I thought it was just bad English!  

[Handy Johnson]

I’m surprised “Sugar” Ray Richardson wasn’t on that list, maybe it just seemed like he made a lot of 3’s...

[Blackshirt83]

My biggest takeaway from this is that Strowbridge is massively underappreciated. 

[Norm Peterson]

5 hours ago, Blackshirt83 said:

My biggest takeaway from this is that Strowbridge is massively underappreciated. 

 

Yup. He and Ade Dagunduro would hang around after practices and put up extra shots. J-R was a good dude. I was sorry to see him go.

Edited November 26, 2020 by Norm Peterson

[Navin R. Johnson]

I did not expect to see Strowbridge on the list and I could not remember Cliff Scales and Henry T Buchanan being that good of a shooter. When I think of pure shooters from the past I think of Cochran, Cresswell and Conklin.