Live by the 3...die by the 3

[braveatheart]

It seems that Bradley has some games when the 3 point shots just don't fall. In the 4 wins this season we are 29-81 on three pointers for 35.8%. In our 3 losses we are 14-63 for 22.2%. It may be a little early to jump to this conclusion but it appears when we shoot it good we will win. When we shoot it bad we have a real good chance of loosing.
Lets look at it another way if we shoot over 35% on 3's we are 2-0. When we shoot under 35% we are 2-3. Against UIC we shoot 4-21 or 19.0% and still won but we shot a ton of free throws which bailed us out. Against FGCU we shot 5-21 for 23.8% and still won but that was against a really bad team(Sagarin has them 320/347) and we bearly won.
SM has been really bad thus far 7-37 18.9% and DN bad too at 6-24 or 25%. TB is 1-6 but he has taken only 6 shots so he is not really the problem. SM hit 3's at a rate of 36.7% last year so you would figure him for better. Maybe it is his foot, maybe it is the line back 12" or maybe it is the sophmore slump like Crouch had. DN is more of an unknown. AW should help our cause if or when he plays as he shot 40.6% last year and made more 3's than anyone but Crouch last year.
It seems that with a small line up we don't have much choice but to play the 3 point game. We may not have the bigs this year to pound the ball down low when the 3's are not falling. Hopefully we can move away from this in the future because the result seem to be we win some games we wouldn't ordinarily win when the 3's fall and loose some we shouldn't when they are not falling such as UMKC(3-17 17.6%).
Maybe it is too early to jump to these conclusion and maybe SM and DN come on strong. Or maybe the line back 12" changes the game and we don't have the shooters or the big guys to play a different game. Lets hope shooters shoot and our bigs step up when they don't.

 

[bluedevils1]

It seems that Bradley has some games when the 3 point shots just don't fall. In the 4 wins this season we are 29-81 on three pointers for 35.8%. In our 3 losses we are 14-63 for 22.2%. It may be a little early to jump to this conclusion but it appears when we shoot it good we will win. When we shoot it bad we have a real good chance of loosing.
Lets look at it another way if we shoot over 35% on 3's we are 2-0. When we shoot under 35% we are 2-3. Against UIC we shoot 4-21 or 19.0% and still won but we shot a ton of free throws which bailed us out. Against FGCU we shot 5-21 for 23.8% and still won but that was against a really bad team(Sagarin has them 320/347) and we bearly won.
SM has been really bad thus far 7-37 18.9% and DN bad too at 6-24 or 25%. TB is 1-6 but he has taken only 6 shots so he is not really the problem. SM hit 3's at a rate of 36.7% last year so you would figure him for better. Maybe it is his foot, maybe it is the line back 12" or maybe it is the sophmore slump like Crouch had. DN is more of an unknown. AW should help our cause if or when he plays as he shot 40.6% last year and made more 3's than anyone but Crouch last year.
It seems that with a small line up we don't have much choice but to play the 3 point game. We may not have the bigs this year to pound the ball down low when the 3's are not falling. Hopefully we can move away from this in the future because the result seem to be we win some games we wouldn't ordinarily win when the 3's fall and loose some we shouldn't when they are not falling such as UMKC(3-17 17.6%).
Maybe it is too early to jump to these conclusion and maybe SM and DN come on strong. Or maybe the line back 12" changes the game and we don't have the shooters or the big guys to play a different game. Lets hope shooters shoot and our bigs step up when they don't.

We are a guard-oriented team. Our offense is based around 3 pointers. If we shoot badly, just like many other teams in the country, we will lose. It's pretty simple.

 

[Braves4Life]

We are a guard-oriented team. Our offense is based around 3 pointers. If we shoot badly, just like many other teams in the country, we will lose. It's pretty simple.

Right! Let's hope Jim Jackson's comments as the announcer for the Big-10 Network pay some future dividends: "If you shoot the 3 you need to play for Bradley. They shoot a lot of 3-pointers" (or something to that effect)

 

[BradleyBrave]

I don't think that it's coincidence that when we have a capable inside presence, things open up for our perimeter players and we shoot better. Zach Andrews was a capable inside player, and we shot the ball well. Matt Salley was a serviceable inside presence, and we shot OK but not as well as the year before. We started the year off with a non-existent inside presence, and shot poorly. We changed our lineup, and had a capable inside presence, and we shot great. That guy got hurt, and we're back to shooting poorly. Now, obviously there are other factors that play into everything (personnel, injuries, opponents), but I don't think it's a coincidence.

For what it's worth, I thought David Collins played one of his best games in his time at BU yesterday. For whatever reason, he looked he wanted to be out there more than he had earlier in the year. I don't think DC has a real high ceiling, but I hope that he can bring that same aggressiveness against opponents that he can actually be successful against.

 

[braveatheart]

We are a guard-oriented team. Our offense is based around 3 pointers. If we shoot badly, just like many other teams in the country, we will lose. It's pretty simple.

I guess it is pretty simple. I mean other things matter also like, defense, rebounding, turnovers and foul shooting but the fate of our team this year is tied to the sucess of our three point shooting.
If we were willing to play more big guys at the same time we wouldn't have to play this numbers game. We could rely on shorter shots that don't run so hot or cold.
Don't get me wrong, I think the 3 is a great way to kill giants or cover up a lack of inside game. The flip side though is you loose games you shouldn't.
Hopefully at some point we can develope our inside game to the point where we can still win when the 3 pointers run cold. Maybe next year with JP,WE,TB,JW,ATandMK we can start going in that direction.

 

[braveatheart]

I don't think that it's coincidence that when we have a capable inside presence, things open up for our perimeter players and we shoot better. Zach Andrews was a capable inside player, and we shot the ball well. Matt Salley was a serviceable inside presence, and we shot OK but not as well as the year before. We started the year off with a non-existent inside presence, and shot poorly. We changed our lineup, and had a capable inside presence, and we shot great. That guy got hurt, and we're back to shooting poorly. Now, obviously there are other factors that play into everything (personnel, injuries, opponents), but I don't think it's a coincidence.

For what it's worth, I thought David Collins played one of his best games in his time at BU yesterday. For whatever reason, he looked he wanted to be out there more than he had earlier in the year. I don't think DC has a real high ceiling, but I hope that he can bring that same aggressiveness against opponents that he can actually be successful against.

Good point BB we cant be one dimensional. Our outside shooting is helped by a strong inside game.
I am with you on DC. I have always been a fan of his although his critics do have valid points. He may not be the total answer but he is certianly a big part of the the answer this year. AW has also got to be a big part of the answer.

 

[Out of Bounce]

I don't think that it's coincidence that when we have a capable inside presence, things open up for our perimeter players and we shoot better. Zach Andrews was a capable inside player, and we shot the ball well. Matt Salley was a serviceable inside presence, and we shot OK but not as well as the year before. We started the year off with a non-existent inside presence, and shot poorly. We changed our lineup, and had a capable inside presence, and we shot great. That guy got hurt, and we're back to shooting poorly. Now, obviously there are other factors that play into everything (personnel, injuries, opponents), but I don't think it's a coincidence.

BB you make some sense here about a capable inside presence can lead to opening things up on the perimeter. I agree with that totally.
Please explain how having WE in the game made us make/shoot the 3 better because I saw a lot of wide open 3's missed Sunday. I think it's more if you are a shooter you will make a good % of your shots and if your hot, your hot and it does not matter who is in the game, not even God.
JK:lol:

 

[dogsrus]

We need AT plain and simple and all are troubles will be gone.....

 

[BradleyBrave]

BB you make some sense here about a capable inside presence can lead to opening things up on the perimeter. I agree with that totally.
Please explain how having WE in the game made us make/shoot the 3 better because I saw a lot of wide open 3's missed Sunday. I think it's more if you are a shooter you will make a good % of your shots and if your hot, your hot and it does not matter who is in the game, not even God.
JK:lol:

Like I said, there were other factors involved, and in this case I think it was the opponent. I don't think a lot of those 3's were as open as we think. MSU is a great defensive team and BU had to work their @ss off for every open look. When BU did get an open look, I think they rushed a lot of those shots because they knew MSU would be quick to cover up. A real post presence might have forced MSU to pay a little more attention to the post rather than the perimeter, and may have given our guys that extra half-second to get set and get a clean look. It's just a theory, but we played our best basketball so far this year with WE, a legitimate post threat, as part of our lineup.

 

[Out of Bounce]

Like I said, there were other factors involved, and in this case I think it was the opponent. I don't think a lot of those 3's were as open as we think. MSU is a great defensive team and BU had to work their @ss off for every open look. When BU did get an open look, I think they rushed a lot of those shots because they knew MSU would be quick to cover up. A real post presence might have forced MSU to pay a little more attention to the post rather than the perimeter, and may have given our guys that extra half-second to get set and get a clean look. It's just a theory, but we played our best basketball so far this year with WE, a legitimate post threat, as part of our lineup.

From my seat in front of the 52" there were some pretty good looks but as you said above and I agree that most the shots were rushed as our young guys could feel the heat. And I do agree with you on WE and playing our best ball. I think we both agree if this team is going to be successful this year we have to be more consistent shooting and the % of 3's will have to be good, every game. Not one good game and then a bad one.

 

[lefty]

We need AT plain and simple and all are troubles will be gone.....

I think if that was true he would be playing

 

[BradleyBrave]

From my seat in front of the 52" there were some pretty good looks but as you said above and I agree that most the shots were rushed as our young guys could feel the heat. And I do agree with you on WE and playing our best ball. I think we both agree if this team is going to be successful this year we have to be more consistent shooting and the % of 3's will have to be good, every game. Not one good game and then a bad one.

I think what is frustrating for me, is that if every night, BU gave the effort that they gave in the 1st half, I don't know who would beat them. I really don't. If you defend and rebound like that, you can shoot 10% against most teams and still win.

 

[Scouter]

From my seat in front of the 52" there were some pretty good looks but as you said above and I agree that most the shots were rushed as our young guys could feel the heat. And I do agree with you on WE and playing our best ball. I think we both agree if this team is going to be successful this year we have to be more consistent shooting and the % of 3's will have to be good, every game. Not one good game and then a bad one.

52-inch TV? We talking hi-def? If so, I'd like to invite myself over for a game...

 

[Braves4Life]

I think if that was true he would be playing

I'm pretty sure he was joking.... tongue-in-cheek

 

[Rusty 54]

Like I said, there were other factors involved, and in this case I think it was the opponent. I don't think a lot of those 3's were as open as we think. MSU is a great defensive team and BU had to work their @ss off for every open look. When BU did get an open look, I think they rushed a lot of those shots because they knew MSU would be quick to cover up. A real post presence might have forced MSU to pay a little more attention to the post rather than the perimeter, and may have given our guys that extra half-second to get set and get a clean look. It's just a theory, but we played our best basketball so far this year with WE, a legitimate post threat, as part of our lineup.

I guess along with saying that Michigan State rushed our looks you have to say that FGCU and Richmond probably did not hurry our shooters as much, so that plays a part as well. I am with you on Egolf. I thought that if we could get a contribution from either WE or AT this year we could do serious damage in conference, and it looked like Will was starting to get comfortable.

 

[Out of Bounce]

I think what is frustrating for me, is that if every night, BU gave the effort that they gave in the 1st half, I don't know who would beat them. I really don't. If you defend and rebound like that, you can shoot 10% against most teams and still win.

10%:-o:-o:-o Can't agree with that, as I don't think that has ever happen not even back in your days BB.:lol:

 

[Out of Bounce]

52-inch TV? We talking hi-def? If so, I'd like to invite myself over for a game...

Thats right Scouter, hi-def;-) And yes you can come over and I will have beer for you too. I'm just glad you are ok as I haven't heard much out of you lately:biggrin:

 

[BradleyBrave]

I guess along with saying that Michigan State rushed our looks you have to say that FGCU and Richmond probably did not hurry our shooters as much, so that plays a part as well. I am with you on Egolf. I thought that if we could get a contribution from either WE or AT this year we could do serious damage in conference, and it looked like Will was starting to get comfortable.

Correct Rusty, those teams you mentioned did not rush our guys. FGCU, Richmond, and ETSU did not defend as well as MSU. Also, there isn't the perception that they're defending as well, so thus there's seemingly no need to rush shots.

I want more AT. The guy can run the floor, is long, is athletic, and is skilled around the basket. Drop him in the water and let him sink or swim. Enough babying.

 

[BradleyBrave]

10%:-o:-o:-o Can't agree with that, as I don't think that has ever happen not even back in your days BB.:lol:

Back in the peach basket days?

I was exaggerating a bit, but the point is the same. If BU would come out with the same toughness and intensity it showed defensively and on the glass, they'd win a lot more games. One the one hand I think it looked like progress, but on the other hand I am reminded of the 2nd half when it wasn't there anymore.

 

[thefish7]

Good points both, BB-- On the change between 1st and 2nd half, and on the more AT side of things.