Plain and Simple: Shooting Percentages

[WinOneThisCentury]

Illinois shot the ball extremely well yesterday...and many of the shots were seriously contested. They were probably shooting 60% from three after 34 minutes of play and then went cold. I think the defense was good the second half and not that bad the first. 68 points isn't a ton when they made 10 threes.

The issue for Iowa is shooting the basketball plain and simple. If this team shoots like this (other than Jok or Uthoff), they don't get out of the first round. You can't have two people on the floor like Sapp and Gesell who can't score for that long. Sapp should have sat most of the second half...based on his play. He was also turning it over. Not shooting well, turning it over, sit him. I think you have to go big, Uhl, Uthoff, Woodbury, Jok and Gesell and you play more zone if necessary...and play Wagner and Baer more minutes.

I get Fran's loyalty to the senior players...but we needed offense yesterday outside of Jok and Uthoff and when Woody and Sapp were liabilities on that end...they have to sit longer and let Uhl, Baer, and Wagner get the minutes.

 

[cg8284]

It's hard to shoot a good percentage when the offense doesn't initiate any high percentage shots. When you're bad in the half court you have to initiate baskets with defense and they just haven't done that besides the last 4 min of the game yesterday. They have to get some things figured out offensively going into next year so it's not just a bunch of standing around.

 

[EpenesaEpenesa]

Its amazing how everyone is shooting out of their minds against Iowa, just bad luck I guess. Also, Iowa's defense is terrible and was terrible yesterday. All 3s are not the same. If you have the space and time to get off a 3 and you are in rhythm, a good percentage will go. Iowa doesnt harrass shooters, they let them get comfortable and Iowa's way of contesting is jumping at shooters with a hand up, that's awful defense on any level. That doesnt even include the multiple mental breakdowns (ex. Woodbury giving up 2 wide open layups the first 3 minutes) This team plays terrible defense and has the past 4 weeks.

 

[hawkeyemike23]

Here's a percentage for you: 13.6%.

Know what that is? Gesell's shooting percentage in his last three B10 Tournament games combined.

 

[Iafootballfan]

Opposing shooting percentages reflect defense most of the time, especially 3pt %.

 

[whatsup13579er]

Illinois shot the ball extremely well yesterday...and many of the shots were seriously contested. They were probably shooting 60% from three after 34 minutes of play and then went cold. I think the defense was good the second half and not that bad the first. 68 points isn't a ton when they made 10 threes.

The issue for Iowa is shooting the basketball plain and simple. If this team shoots like this (other than Jok or Uthoff), they don't get out of the first round. You can't have two people on the floor like Sapp and Gesell who can't score for that long. Sapp should have sat most of the second half...based on his play. He was also turning it over. Not shooting well, turning it over, sit him. I think you have to go big, Uhl, Uthoff, Woodbury, Jok and Gesell and you play more zone if necessary...and play Wagner and Baer more minutes.

I get Fran's loyalty to the senior players...but we needed offense yesterday outside of Jok and Uthoff and when Woody and Sapp were liabilities on that end...they have to sit longer and let Uhl, Baer, and Wagner get the minutes.

We weren't watching the same game. Illinois was getting wide open looks, both under the basket and from outside. One 3 that Illinois missed from the wing late in the game, Iowa didn't have a defender on that half of the court.

Over the last 8 games, Iowa opponents have shot 46%, 39%, 46%, 48%, 45%, 51%, 36%, and 45%. Are you trying to tell me that all in all 6 of these losses that teams just got hot? No. One game you could contribute a loss to a team just getting hot and it wasn't your day. When it has happened 6 times in 8 games it is a trend. Iowa is not playing very good defense. If Iowa would nut up, play defense, contest shots, and hold teams to 40% shooting, they would have won all of those games!

 

[whatsup13579er]

To expand on that thought, Iowa has shot 46%, 42%, 41%, 32%, 41%, 39%, 45%, and 40% in those 8 games. Iowa hasn't been shooting the ball horribly outside of the Wisconsin game. Shooting over 40% should be good enough to win if you play defense. And if you play defense, you are likely to get a couple easy buckets from it and your shooting percentage should improve.

 

[EpenesaEpenesa]

To expand on that thought, Iowa has shot 46%, 42%, 41%, 32%, 41%, 39%, 45%, and 40% in those 8 games. Iowa hasn't been shooting the ball horribly outside of the Wisconsin game. Shooting over 40% should be good enough to win if you play defense. And if you play defense, you are likely to get a couple easy buckets from it and your shooting percentage should improve.

Yep. If Iowa played any D at all, they would not be in this spot.

 

[WinOneThisCentury]

I agree in the stretch of games leading up to Michigan the defense was struggling a bit...but at Michigan it was much better and I thought yesterday was better too. Illinois had several possession that ticked down to the last seconds on the clock yesterday and they made shots...do you think they held the ball because they weren't being defended. It also doesn't help your defense when you are going through two stretches in the game where you shoot 1 for 9 and 1 for 12 or something similar. Add in the turnovers and you have a serious problem on defense because of your putrid offense. Blaming it solely on the defense is inaccurate. Illinois got threes in transition because we went stretches where we couldn't make a basket and were were turning it over...that's tough to defend for any defense and they were knocking them down. I could argue similar statistics on the offensive side of the ball...in four of those losses we shot less than 40% from the field and some in the 25% to 27% from three. Offense impacts defense too guys.

 

[EpenesaEpenesa]

I agree in the stretch of games leading up to Michigan the defense was struggling a bit...but at Michigan it was much better and I thought yesterday was better too. Illinois had several possession that ticked down to the last seconds on the clock yesterday and they made shots....

Like wide open 3s in the corner with the shot clock running out? Playing defense for 25 seconds and breaking down the last 5 isnt good defense. Sorry

 

[whatsup13579er]

I could argue similar statistics on the offensive side of the ball...in four of those losses we shot less than 40% from the field and some in the 25% to 27% from three. Offense impacts defense too guys.

Only 2 games did Iowa shoot under 40% and only one (Wisconsin) was the shooting really poor.

Like wide open 3s in the corner with the shot clock running out? Playing defense for 25 seconds and breaking down the last 5 isnt good defense. Sorry

You hit the nail on the head. It seems Iowa defense panics late in the shot clock, gives up on their responsibilities, and leaves shooters wide open.

 

[MWardT]

It's hard to shoot a good percentage when the offense doesn't initiate any high percentage shots. When you're bad in the half court you have to initiate baskets with defense and they just haven't done that besides the last 4 min of the game yesterday. They have to get some things figured out offensively going into next year so it's not just a bunch of standing around.

Agree. I think in the last four minutes of yesterday's game you saw the defensive intensity rise, which led to some easy baskets in transition. Iowa's shooting percentage is down because they aren't getting any easy baskets, whether that's in transition or in the post.

IMO, if the defensive intensity rises, as we saw in the final four minutes yesterday, it will fuel the offense. Iowa just isn't making any plays or forcing any turnovers on defense and it affects the offense.

 

[MepoDawg#]

I agree in the stretch of games leading up to Michigan the defense was struggling a bit...but at Michigan it was much better and I thought yesterday was better too. Illinois had several possession that ticked down to the last seconds on the clock yesterday and they made shots...do you think they held the ball because they weren't being defended. It also doesn't help your defense when you are going through two stretches in the game where you shoot 1 for 9 and 1 for 12 or something similar. Add in the turnovers and you have a serious problem on defense because of your putrid offense. Blaming it solely on the defense is inaccurate. Illinois got threes in transition because we went stretches where we couldn't make a basket and were were turning it over...that's tough to defend for any defense and they were knocking them down. I could argue similar statistics on the offensive side of the ball...in four of those losses we shot less than 40% from the field and some in the 25% to 27% from three. Offense impacts defense too guys.

Illinois had a lot of open looks underneath the basket early. That was all defense there from Woody hedging and no rotation. Then that led to open 3's as the guards would get stuck between rotating down and trying to cover the corner 3. It's the zone defense that stinks.

 

[WinOneThisCentury]

Only 2 games did Iowa shoot under 40% and only one (Wisconsin) was the shooting really poor.

Sorry...they shot under 40% twice...you are correct...and they shot 40 exactly, and 41% twice in three of the other games...sorry i was way off. During the 10-1 start, the lowest percentage we shot was 43% and but we shot the three well (similar percentages) in those games to offset those percentages. And if you look at the three point line, it's much worse than earlier in the year when we were winning. Blaming it on the defense solely is ridiculous, especially after watching three guys go 2-20 yesterday...yeah...all defense. Right.

 

[WinOneThisCentury]

Sorry...they shot under 40% twice...you are correct...and they shot 40 exactly, and 41% twice in three of the other games...sorry i was way off. During the 10-1 start, the lowest percentage we shot was 43% but we shot the three well (similar percentages) in those games to offset those percentages. And if you look at the three point line, it's much worse than earlier in the year when we were winning. Blaming it on the defense solely is ridiculous, especially after watching three guys go 2-20 yesterday...yeah...all defense. Right.

 

[And1Hawk]

How about each player just guard their own man especially out at the three point arc? In contrast to running around to double someone or sagging into to the paint to help leaving a shooter wide open. I would much rather give up a 2 than a 3 all day.

There is little basketball IQ on this team. MG & AC sag off the 3 line to help at 12-15 feet when that's a low % / reward shot. Please take those all day. The ball then gets kicked back out to a now set 3 point shooter based on their help for a wide open 3. Bingo it is in. The guards are not alone with Woody's over hedge and even JU leaves his guy wide open doubling for no reason (see OSU Loving 3 ball at end of game).

I am not really sure we ever played effective defense and got lucky that teams missed more in the first half of the season. PSU's 1-20 were a lot of wide open 3's they hit the next time we played as an example.

That's what I want to see next year is with better athletes on the floor 1-5, can we play better man D with some experience?

 

[whatsup13579er]

Sorry...they shot under 40% twice...you are correct...and they shot 40 exactly, and 41% twice in three of the other games...sorry i was way off. During the 10-1 start, the lowest percentage we shot was 43% but we shot the three well (similar percentages) in those games to offset those percentages. And if you look at the three point line, it's much worse than earlier in the year when we were winning. Blaming it on the defense solely is ridiculous, especially after watching three guys go 2-20 yesterday...yeah...all defense. Right.

That's the point. You are going to have nights where the shots aren't falling. Yes Mike, Sapp, and Woody were an atrocious 2-20, but Jok and Uthoff were a red hot 19-32. 40% as a team isn't bad.

If you play good, tough defense that is basically guaranteed to be there night in and night out. When the shots aren't falling you are still giving yourself a chance to win.

 

[WinOneThisCentury]

That's the point. You are going to have nights where the shots aren't falling. Yes Mike, Sapp, and Woody were an atrocious 2-20, but Jok and Uthoff were a red hot 19-32. 40% as a team isn't bad.

If you play good, tough defense that is basically guaranteed to be there night in and night out. When the shots aren't falling you are still giving yourself a chance to win.

You just made my point for me...so tell me...which games down the stretch did Iowa not have a chance to win? We had a chance to win all of them as we lost them in the last 5 minutes...so does that mean our defense kept us in them based on your logic? In the losses we shot lower percentages than most of our other games from the field and lower especially from three. So, since our defense is giving us to a chance to win, if we shoot the 45-46% we shot in the first 11 Big Ten games, we win most of those close losses. Right? Teams weren't blowing us out, and teams weren't scoring 80 points...only Indiana scored 80...twice. The other games were us going cold at the end of games and making bad decisions with the ball late on the offensive end...Period.

 

[Bearhawk0505]

Illinois shot the ball extremely well yesterday...and many of the shots were seriously contested. They were probably shooting 60% from three after 34 minutes of play and then went cold. I think the defense was good the second half and not that bad the first. 68 points isn't a ton when they made 10 threes.

The issue for Iowa is shooting the basketball plain and simple. If this team shoots like this (other than Jok or Uthoff), they don't get out of the first round. You can't have two people on the floor like Sapp and Gesell who can't score for that long. Sapp should have sat most of the second half...based on his play. He was also turning it over. Not shooting well, turning it over, sit him. I think you have to go big, Uhl, Uthoff, Woodbury, Jok and Gesell and you play more zone if necessary...and play Wagner and Baer more minutes.

I get Fran's loyalty to the senior players...but we needed offense yesterday outside of Jok and Uthoff and when Woody and Sapp were liabilities on that end...they have to sit longer and let Uhl, Baer, and Wagner get the minutes.

You sound like an offensive minded coach that struggles to win in the postseason......is that you coach? Sarcasm aside, I think you do make some valid points that do apply to this team.

 

[WinOneThisCentury]

You sound like an offensive minded coach that struggles to win in the postseason......is that you coach? Sarcasm aside, I think you do make some valid points that do apply to this team.

I just think people always look at defense as if your offensive success doesn't have anything to do with this. "This team is good when they are getting stops/steals and getting out in transition...and creating easy buckets and open threes." What the hell do you think is happening when we go 1-9 and 1-12 in two stretches yesterday...advantage Illinois for two long stretches and we got down double digits. We got down twice because we shot the ball poorly to open the game and to open the second half. It's an uphill battle the whole way...in both halves. Fran's team didn't quit, and came back, which tells you something...but they can't have those stretches of offensive ineptitude. It's not necessarily the defense that is the issue with why they are scoring. We had three starters that were 2-20 and turning the ball over and missing layups...with the turnovers it's 2-29. 2 buckets for freaking 29 possessions. Pin the tail on the loss boys. I know Jok and Uthoff were shooting well...and it offsets, but it doesn't offset 4 points out of a possible 58 points and who knows how many more points if some were threes. Get off the defense.

 

[whatsup13579er]

Iowa was shooting 47%, 44% from 3 thru the first 7 B1G games and it turned out to be fools gold. The offense has come back to Earth. Iowa is a low 40's percentage shooting team, mid-high 30's from 3. That is who they are. Iowa needs to find a way to make up for the 5-10 points a game they aren't getting shooting from the field.

Where do those points come from? Defensive intensity? Offensive execution? Free throws?

 

[WinOneThisCentury]

I'm not sure how you play 22 or whatever games shooting 45-46% and 38% from three and say that can't continue...that's a large sample set of data. We then drop off off to 40-41% and low 30s in the difficult stretch of losses. Do teams get tougher the second time around? Sure...do they learn our tendencies...sure. Is it possible our starters hit a wall...sure. But we have had so many wide open threes that have clanked off...and missed bunnies...those are shots that haven't changed from the beginning of the year to the end. We were hitting those. What we recently did at Michigan was what we were doing all year prior...guys were stepping up and hitting big shots...Sapp with the corner three...Uthoff and Jok with big shots. It hasn't happened in this stretch consistently and that's the point of where I think we have lost. I would look at the shooting as the fault or let down, much more so than the defense. Bench defense, in my opinion has been solid...bench scoring during this stretch has been terrible, absolutely terrible. All signs point to offense in my opinion.

 

[Hawk_4shur]

Problems like this are never simple. The reason Iowa isn't winning right now isn't one or two problems. And everyone gets some of the blame.

 

[hawkeyemike23]

Problems like this are never simple. The reason Iowa isn't winning right now isn't one or two problems. And everyone gets some of the blame.

I disagree, let's call them by their names, Mike Gesell and Anthony Clemmons.

 

[Hawk_4shur]

I disagree, let's call them by their names, Mike Gesell and Anthony Clemmons.

Disagree. Woodbury can't score, Uhtoff is a 4 that can't, or won't, bang inside, the bench has come up way short, and the HC certainly gets some blame. Even Pete gets some blame in the last game - has 29 points and 4 fouls and shoves a guy. Not smart.

 

[dawgs_04]

As much as everybody wants to believe we get lit up from 3, we lead the league in 3pt % against during conference games and 26th nationally.

The problem is 2 point defense (and let's not get started about our offense from 5 feet away). Guards can't stop penetration and there are no enforcers down low. We get sliced and diced when teams penetrate and/or swing the ball. We chase people around because we're slow/weak.

 

[dawgs_04]

Opposing shooting percentages reflect defense most of the time, especially 3pt %.

I thought the common belief is exactly the opposite i.e. the defense has little to no effect on opponent shooting %

 

[hawkeyemike23]

Disagree. Woodbury can't score, Uhtoff is a 4 that can't, or won't, bang inside, the bench has come up way short, and the HC certainly gets some blame. Even Pete gets some blame in the last game - has 29 points and 4 fouls and shoves a guy. Not smart.

Yes, Uthoff the guy who is first team All B10 is our problem, the guy who scored 21 is our problem. Not our two epically terrible guards who can't shoot and can't make a clutch play if their lives depended on it. Good lord.

 

[Hawk_4shur]

Yes, Uthoff the guy who is first team All B10 is our problem, the guy who scored 21 is our problem. Not our two epically terrible guards who can't shoot and can't make a clutch play if their lives depended on it. Good lord.

I think you are the one that wants to keep it simple. So, a 4 year starter and another senior with substantial playing experience are our problems? And, they are "epically" terrible, apparently meaning to of the worst guards in history? And, everything else on the team is fine? I don't think so.

 

[HawkLogic]

Illinois had a lot of open looks underneath the basket early. That was all defense there from Woody hedging and no rotation. Then that led to open 3's as the guards would get stuck between rotating down and trying to cover the corner 3. It's the zone defense that stinks.

Early in season, teams weren't skilled enough/coached enough to take advantage of the zone traps and extreme hedging Fran does. It comes down to poor athletes. The zone for awhile hid it, but we can't rebound for chit out of it so we end up giving up a lot of 2nd, 3rd shots. Man to Man defense....Jok is a very slow 3 defensively, Gesell and clemmons are extremely short, Woody has no vertical and is not shot blocker. Uthoff is only guy with length, athleticism.

This team was exposed, and now you can stick a fork in them. The only thing they have going for them is they won't be as well scouted in NCAA tourney. This is exactly 2014. That year Devyn Marble was stuck with the 3 amigos and McCabe on top of it.

 

[hawkeyemike23]

I think you are the one that wants to keep it simple. So, a 4 year starter and another senior with substantial playing experience are our problems? And, they are "epically" terrible, apparently meaning to of the worst guards in history? And, everything else on the team is fine? I don't think so.

Yes. Absolutely they are. Put Ullis and any other guard we missed out on in for Gesell and Clemmons and were a top five big ten regular season champ. Ullis stood up to Boogie Cousins before he even played a game in college, Gesell would have pissed himself in the same situation.