Started By
Message
re: NIT Watch 2014 (artist formerly known as Bubble Watch)
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:04 pm to DaleDenton
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:04 pm to DaleDenton
quote:
The had the total margin due to poor shooting.
We shot 43% from the field, and 38% combined.
They shot 38% from the field, and 39% combined.
quote:
All the total rebound number shows is a poor shooting performance by one or both sides.
We were pretty much dead even shooting wise, they made 2 more three's than us, and we shot a decent 43% from the field.
We got outrebounded by 16.
It's why we lost. And SC has jack shite down low.
1
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:08 pm to UltimateHog
I'm glad you know how to twist the statistics, give incomplete data, combine data, etc to fit your argument, but that is not what this thread is about.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:11 pm to DaleDenton
Twist statistics? Wtf are you talking about?
Shooting is listed in the box score.
We lost from terrible rebounding, we played pretty well outside of that.
Sorry you can't handle facts.
Shooting is listed in the box score.
We lost from terrible rebounding, we played pretty well outside of that.
Sorry you can't handle facts.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:11 pm to DaleDenton
quote:
Bob Knight has been preaching that for decades now
Yep. He planted the seed. It makes complete sense if we are really wanting the best and most deserving teams to play for the championship.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:15 pm to kilo
What's funny is we shot better from the field today than we did at Kentucky, at Miss State, and in our win against SC.
We didn't shoot "poorly" we were about average.
We played good defense.
We just could not rebound, and lost because of it.
In fact, we were getting destroyed on the boards so bad that for the first time all season we had Portis, Kingsley, and Clarke on the floor at the same time.
We didn't shoot "poorly" we were about average.
We played good defense.
We just could not rebound, and lost because of it.
In fact, we were getting destroyed on the boards so bad that for the first time all season we had Portis, Kingsley, and Clarke on the floor at the same time.
This post was edited on 3/13/14 at 9:16 pm
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:17 pm to UltimateHog
quote:
We just could not rebound, and lost because of it.
No trolling at all man, but that sounds very familiar if you know what I mean.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:21 pm to kilo
I can live with it this year, two true freshmen down low was really all we had for big guys.
Clarke is more of a 3, although he'll hit the glass hard, he's undersized and when you pair him with Portis like we did most of the year it's tough. Gulley/Madden/Bell do not rebound well at all like some guards do.
Portis has a long ways to go in terms of the glass, physicality, muscle/size. He'll get there though, and him and Kingsley will be beasts down low.
There's still really no excuse for getting outrebounded that bad when you shoot a similar percentage from the field, against an awful team with nothing down low.
Clarke is more of a 3, although he'll hit the glass hard, he's undersized and when you pair him with Portis like we did most of the year it's tough. Gulley/Madden/Bell do not rebound well at all like some guards do.
Portis has a long ways to go in terms of the glass, physicality, muscle/size. He'll get there though, and him and Kingsley will be beasts down low.
There's still really no excuse for getting outrebounded that bad when you shoot a similar percentage from the field, against an awful team with nothing down low.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:21 pm to UltimateHog
quote:
Twist statistics? Wtf are you talking about?
What you are not.
I said Arkansas has a bad shooting night meaning it was in reference to their average shooting performances.
Arkansas shot 21% from 3 well below their season average, they gave up 10 points on the FT line, but by all means blame the loss on rebounds which are worth zero points.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:22 pm to UltimateHog
If you're right about y'all getting in, then I'll be more than happy to eat some crow. I want as many SEC teams as possible and you've almost convinced me it's possible. I just look at your last two games and don't see the committee looking upon it favorably.
As an aside, Arky looked a little lackadaisical for what was essentially a play in game. It was concerning. Too tight? Nerves? I doubt theyve tuned out Mike already.
As an aside, Arky looked a little lackadaisical for what was essentially a play in game. It was concerning. Too tight? Nerves? I doubt theyve tuned out Mike already.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:23 pm to DaleDenton
Rebounding means nothing in basketball.
signed,
Dennis Rodman
signed,
Dennis Rodman
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:24 pm to DaleDenton
quote:
Arkansas shot 21% from 3 well below their season average, they gave up 10 points on the FT line, but by all means blame the loss on rebounds which are worth zero points.
SC made 2 more three's than we did, talk about twisting statistics.
We shot pretty decent, about our average, and plenty good enough to win, if we could have rebounded.
You can't expect to make a bunch of 3's/outside shots when going into a foreign building, especially a football stadium. So that's on the coaching then, because we shot decent from the field, better than SC, and still got outrebounded by fricking 16.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:25 pm to MenloDawg
Trying too hard.
They looked focused.
Many turnovers from trying to hard, trying to do what they can't towards the end of that game.
If you want to see them lackadaisical, find the tape of the game where the scored 20 points in the first half against a low major.
I wish there was tape of the locker room because they came out and scored 60 in the 2nd half.
They looked focused.
Many turnovers from trying to hard, trying to do what they can't towards the end of that game.
If you want to see them lackadaisical, find the tape of the game where the scored 20 points in the first half against a low major.
I wish there was tape of the locker room because they came out and scored 60 in the 2nd half.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:26 pm to MenloDawg
quote:
I just look at your last two games and don't see the committee looking upon it favorably.
The committee looks a whole body of work, and they don't take much from the conference tournaments. We ended the regular season going 8-2.
We need help, but it's possible.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:27 pm to UltimateHog
quote:
SC made 2 more three's than we did, talk about twisting statistics.
Arkansas shot less than half of their average from behind the arc, they made 3 threes, if they shot their average, they would have made 5 for the amount of shots they attempted.
They were outscored by 1 point on the offensive glass.
They were outscored by 10 on the FT line.
So in a two point loss it was the 20 meaningless defensive rebounds that Carolina got that led to the loss, not the 10 points extra given up on the FT line.
Yeah, OK.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:28 pm to dkreller
Tell me about Quinnepec, the are so damn good at rebounding, best in the land 3 years running.
This post was edited on 3/13/14 at 9:29 pm
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:31 pm to DaleDenton
quote:
20 meaningless defensive rebounds that Carolina got that led to the loss,
If those defensive rebounds kept the ball in SC's hands and out of Ark's hands so Ark couldn't score of of 2nd attempts, are the rebounds meaningless?
Basketball isn't just about scoring points, there's a lot more that goes into the game that teams need to do well in order to be successful. Like stopping the other team from scoring, rebounding and having excellent physical conditioning to allow players to play 2 games in less than 24 hours.
This post was edited on 3/13/14 at 9:32 pm
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:32 pm to DaleDenton
quote:
Arkansas shot less than half of their average from behind the arc, they made 3 threes, if they shot their average, they would have made 5 for the amount of shots they attempted.
Again, you can't expect to hit outside shots consistently with this team, in a football stadium. You and the staff should know this going in, we aren't a good shooting team period, especially from deep, especially away from home. Much less in the Georgia Dome, a harder place to shoot in than any road game we played.
So what did we do? We took limited 3's, didn't chuck up near as many as usual, and shot a decent 43% from the field instead. That should win you the game with good defense.
Did we play good defense? We did, did pretty well on that end. Allowing 15 offensive rebounds, and getting outrebounded by 16 was the difference.
We shot a higher FG%, FT%, won the turnover margin by 6.
We beat them in literally every category but rebounding and 3PT % in which they made two more three's. We had more assists, steals, blocks, FG%, FT%, Turnovers forced.
Keep thinking rebounding doesn't matter though, when it's probably the most important thing in the game.
This post was edited on 3/13/14 at 9:34 pm
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:39 pm to CockInYourEar
quote:
If those defensive rebounds kept the ball in SC's hands and out of Ark's hands so Ark couldn't score of of 2nd attempts, are the rebounds meaningless?
He doesn't understand that.
I've never met anyone in my life that actually thinks rebounding doesn't matter in basketball.
Could you imagine if he tried telling that to a coach?
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:45 pm to DaleDenton
quote:
DaleDenton
Basketball is clearly too complicated for your mind. If you would stop thinking of LSU so much, you might figure it out.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:55 pm to UltimateHog
FT % means nothing when you give up 10 extra points at the line in a 2 point game.
Math isn't your strong suit, is it?
Math isn't your strong suit, is it?
Page 13 of 33
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News