Rest of the way

[seattlebuff]

I agree that defense and rebounding are certainly pillars of the program. And the recruits that have been brought in have primarily been very good defensive players.

With that said, it's not like defense/rebounding and outside shooting are mutually exclusive.

Exactly. All I've been saying. I love the pillars of the program. We just need a couple complimentary pieces that can maybe help when maybe were having on off night defensively.

As as for the numbers between Levi, Nate and Brown and this years team, I'd say outside shooting has been a hole throughout the Tad era. Look at that Illinois game last year, where we shot so horribly and dug our selves a hole. Remember all the 6-10 minute stretches we'd have without a bucket? But I still feel like those previous guys could be counted on more from outside, even if it wasn't from 3. Brown and Levi took and hit a fair amount of mid range jumpers, something that is lacking now IMO.

Burks wasn't an outside threat but Higgins could shoot, the mid range jumper, that spreads the defense. And the point is, they were dangerous offensive weapons that we sorely lack now.

 

[jgisland]

I agree that defense and rebounding are certainly pillars of the program. And the recruits that have been brought in have primarily been very good defensive players.

With that said, it's not like defense/rebounding and outside shooting are mutually exclusive.

in general I do agree with this, but I read a study a while back that a players defensive rating and 3 pt % are negatively correlated. Meaning the better a 3 pt shooter a player is the lower the defensive rating they have. I'll see if I can dig it up. Obviously their are outliers to this, but you have to figure a 3pt threat that is a good defensive player would be a high commodity.

 

[rolandftw]

in general I do agree with this, but I read a study a while back that a players defensive rating and 3 pt % are negatively correlated. Meaning the better a 3 pt shooter a player is the lower the defensive rating they have. I'll see if I can dig it up. Obviously their are outliers to this, but you have to figure a 3pt threat that is a good defensive player would be a high commodity.

Would make sense if that was the case, as most players that are great at both coming out of high school tend to be very high recruits. Tho Spencer, clearly was able to both defend and shoot from a high clip outside.

 

[tante]

Would make sense if that was the case, as most players that are great at both coming out of high school tend to be very high recruits. Tho Spencer, clearly was able to both defend and shoot from a high clip outside.

so it looks like he was shooting 41% (44% freshman year, 34% soph)

has anyone done a study on 3 point shooting percentage in college. Do most players gradually get better?

 

[slider]

Insert Eli Stalzer joke here

 

[rolandftw]

so it looks like he was shooting 41% (44% freshman year, 34% soph)

has anyone done a study on 3 point shooting percentage in college. Do most players gradually get better?

Guess it depends how you define better. If it is just shooting percentage, then probably not, since a lot of freshmen don't play as much and have a small sample size that either inflates or undersells how good of a shooter they are. I think most players that have the capacity to be good shooters, produce more as seniors then they do as freshmen, even if the actual percentage might be lower slightly. To me, that is what is important. CU doesn't need a Phil Forte type player (although, I wouldn't complain if they did) but more then one player that can hit above a 35% clip and preferably to be able to average around two 3 pointers per game.

Below, I listed the Top 11 or so shooters that CU has had recently for 3+ years. There are exceptions but for the most part, you can see the increase in production. Of course there are many players that never are able to develop that part of their game, or never stay at Colorado long enough to see what they could have been in year 3 or year 4

Blair Wilson
29 games 30.7% 23/75
29 games 42.9% 76/177
32 games 35.0% 83/237
29 games 39.5% 75/190


Michel Morandais
30 games 40.9% 9/22
26 games 39.0% 16/41
31 games 36.3% 37/102
29 games 36.9% 58/157


Marcus Hall
29 games 39.1% 25/64
29 games 31.1% 38/122
30 games 34.3% 36/105
32 games 38.1% 53/139

Chris Copeland
26 games 25.0% 5/20
28 games 39.3% 11/28
29 games 37.5% 51/136
30 games 35.7% 50/140


Richard Roby
30 games 37.4% 67/179
30 games 35.6% 63/177
27 games 26.8% 37/138
32 games 38.2% 47/123


Cory Higgins
32 games 33.3% 25/75
31 games 36.0% 32/89
31 games 35.6% 32/90
38 games 34.0% 36/106


Levi Knutson
32 games 33.3% 27/81
30 games 22.9% 11/48
23 games 35.7% 10/28
38 games 47.4% 81/171


Nate Tomlinson
28 games 42.7% 35/82
31 games 43.3% 29/67
34 games 46.3% 25/54
36 games 34.3% 36/105


Dwight Thorne II
27 games 15.2% 7/46
29 games 27.7% 13/47
31 games 40.9% 45/110
30 games 45.1% 32/71


Austin Dufault
31 games 24.5% 13/53
31 games 38.1% 16/42
38 games 19.2% 5/26
36 games 35.9% 23/64


Andre Roberson
38 games 34.3% 12/35
36 games 38.0% 19/50
31 games 32.8% 19/58

 

[jgisland]

so it looks like he was shooting 41% (44% freshman year, 34% soph)

has anyone done a study on 3 point shooting percentage in college. Do most players gradually get better?

I looked around on the www and couldn't find anything, so I asked on a few stat geek forums and on twitter. I got something that isn't exactly the answer but still kind of interesting.




This isn't a breakdown of individual player development over the years, it's simply shooting %'s by class for this current season. There are obviously a lot of factors not considered here, like does shooting % go down by class/year when guys that left early for the NBA are not considered.

 

[jgisland]

Guess it depends how you define better. If it is just shooting percentage, then probably not, since a lot of freshmen don't play as much and have a small sample size that either inflates or undersells how good of a shooter they are. I think most players that have the capacity to be good shooters, produce more as seniors then they do as freshmen, even if the actual percentage might be lower slightly. To me, that is what is important. CU doesn't need a Phil Forte type player (although, I wouldn't complain if they did) but more then one player that can hit above a 35% clip and preferably to be able to average around two 3 pointers per game.

Below, I listed the Top 11 or so shooters that CU has had recently for 3+ years. There are exceptions but for the most part, you can see the increase in production. Of course there are many players that never are able to develop that part of their game, or never stay at Colorado long enough to see what they could have been in year 3 or year 4

Agreed, shooting % is kind of a hard factor to isolate, you really need to at offensive rating and usage. It's pretty easy for a Frosh to not play much, shoot a few times and have low usage and have really good FG%. Have to take a lot of situational contexts to make it mean much.

 

[tante]

anyone else think Blair shot at a higher percentage. I guess I was trying to see if the numbers supported the shooters are born and not made argument but the numbers are all over the place.

 

[tante]

So Tad would neg rep me if he reads this post but...

What if we started with a 2-3 zone to throw a wrench on Utah's offensive plans. They show a willingness to drive to the rack or take any 3 point shot that looks decent. I think we can get them to settle for a bunch of long shots (which hopefully don't go in). If we don't start with zone it would be nice to see it within the first 5 minutes. We can settle back into man to man later but would like to see some zone to see how Utah responds.

So now for part two. I am expecting a dead crowd. Noon game, coming off two losses, day before super bowl. I am expecting a bad crowd. What if Tad starts Mills? He always gets the crowd excited
Giving him early minutes will really engage the crowd and fits in with the zone defense plan.

We really need this win so I am willing to shake things up.

JG almost punched me at the game when this lineup came out and I mentioned this post but I just have to quote myself. A 2-3 zone with Scott and Mills = win.

 

[CVilleBuff]

JG almost punched me at the game when this lineup came out and I mentioned this post but I just have to quote myself. A 2-3 zone with Scott and Mills = win.

Any man who likes zone is a friend of mine. Rep.

edit: oh shit i'm out of rep