Posted by mrg1037 on 3/17/2013 2:26:00 AM (view original):
Posted by emy1013 on 3/17/2013 1:17:00 AM (view original):
Posted by mrg1037 on 3/16/2013 2:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by cburton23 on 3/15/2013 11:07:00 PM (view original):
Posted by emy1013 on 3/15/2013 10:16:00 PM (view original):
Definitely the decision of the coach. It's very easy to have a team jack up a bunch of threes. Give high distro to the guards, set 'em at a +2 three point setting and let it fly. Voila, a ton of threes (and probably a loss to go along with it).
I think this is my point, but I didn't make it. If you jack up a tone of 3s you aren't going to win in this game on a regular basis, and by jack up I mean hit the RL average
This is 100% false. In college basketball this season the median for 3PA/FGA is around 33%. Two seasons ago I won a national championship and my team's 3PA/FGA was 33.9%.
First of all, it's all relative what someone considers a "ton" of threes. To me personally, a team that shoots a third of their shots from three point range is just about right. Just about where it should be, so your team shooting 33.9% of their shots from three point range is certainly not, in my book, jacking up a lot of threes. My personal opinion of what is a large number, or jacking up the threes, is more around 40-45, even 50%. So the statement above is not "100% false". In fact, as I just said, your percentage is just about EXACTLY what I would consider a "normal" percentage, so really, thanks for making my point for me. And congrats on your NT.
Like billyg said, I'm arguing against your statement that a team can't win big while shooting a real life number of threes. That is false. I do think your overall point, which is that HD teams on average shoot less threes than real life teams, is probably true.
Did you actually read what you just quoted or are you arguing just to argue? I
just agreed that your team shooting 33.9% of it's shots as threes, which is almost exactly equivalent to the real life avergaes, is what I would consider normal or "just about right". I then went on to say that what I consider to be a "large" number of attempts would be more like around 40-45%, maybe even half. 40-45% or 50% is not a "real life" amount of threes. About 1/3 is, at least according to
your own earlier quote. So, you're arguing against something with me that I'm agreeing about with you. See any kind of small problem with that? Look at it closely and take the time to read the entire post. I'm agreeing with your 1/3 ratios being winnable and disagreeing with the OP's stance that a 1/3 ratio is not conducive to winning in this game. You are now, in essence, arguing with yourself, which sometimes can become so severe that professional intervention is required. Don't get to that point, please.
Ahh, but I think I see now where the confusion is coming in. When I said the statement above was not 100% false, I was referring to
my original statement (the one that ended with Voila). I think, perhaps, that you thought I was referring to the statement posted AFTER mine (by the OP that started "I think this is my.......) when I said it was not 100% false. And therein, I believe, lies the confusion. On both of our parts maybe.
3/17/2013 5:37 AM (edited)