Mac McClung

#251
#251
n_huffhines said:
FG% doesn't really tell the story because scoring efficiency depends on how many 3's and FT's you make. But if we're going to use FG%, some of those are a big discrepancies. The difference between the best team (52.5%) and the 150th place team (44.2%) is 8.3%.

McClung doesn't shoot 40%, he shoots 39%, and Schofield shooting 8% better is a world of difference.

Turner and Bone were not great scorers, but at least they could run the offense and set up other guys. Bowden was more efficient as a scorer, had better size, and he could do a little bit of everything. McClung is a tiny black hole who doesn't do much other than put up shots. Again, if all you can do is score, at least do it well.
Click to expand...

"We" didn't argue using fg% as telling the whole story....you did. Of the players on Georgetown last year scoring in double figures (I dont follow them closely) he had the second highest fg%.

I'm not arguing that we should add him, I'm only offering rebuttal to your assertion that he sucks. He clearly doesn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JelloPuddinPup and ABINGDON VOL FAN
#252
#252
jp1 said:
"We" didn't argue using fg% as telling the whole story....you did. Of the players on Georgetown last year scoring in double figures (I dont follow them closely) he had the second highest fg%.

I'm not arguing that we should add him, I'm only offering rebuttal to your assertion that he sucks. He clearly doesn't.
Click to expand...

I didn't. I used 3 different shooting stats to demonstrate how bad he is.

And that's an incredibly cherry-picked stat. Well done
 
#253
#253
n_huffhines said:
I didn't. I used 3 different shooting stats to demonstrate how bad he is.

And that's an incredibly cherry-picked stat. Well done
Click to expand...

Below was your post. All shooting percentages

QUOTE="n_huffhines, post: 18257122, member: 22163"]He doesn't do anything other than score and he scores with very poor efficiency.

.393 FG%
.456 2P%
.295 3P%

That's atrocious. It's weird that he's such a good FT shooter and can't shoot 3's well, so maybe he'll come around, but as it stands, he's proven he sucks.[/QUOTE]

The reason I used ("cherrypicked") the scorer's in double figures was because they had 5. I assumed this was the players playing more and shooting more.
 
#254
#254
golfballs said:
They seem like a hot mess given all their transfers. Didn’t know that was a legitimate reason for getting a waiver
Click to expand...

As Gary Parris says, if you say that your prior culture mentally affected you, then you have a chance at a waiver. Had multiple players accused of burglary and sexual assault.
 
#255
#255
jp1 said:
Below was your post. All shooting percentages

n_huffhines said:
He doesn't do anything other than score and he scores with very poor efficiency.

.393 FG%
.456 2P%
.295 3P%

That's atrocious. It's weird that he's such a good FT shooter and can't shoot 3's well, so maybe he'll come around, but as it stands, he's proven he sucks.
Click to expand...

The reason I used ("cherrypicked") the scorer's in double figures was because they had 5. I assumed this was the players playing more and shooting more.
Click to expand...

Like I said, I used 3 different shooting stats, not just FG%. Are you serious with this? 🤣

Out of the 4 guys who played most of the year and averaged double digits, he was 4th in true shooting % (behind Allen, Mosely, and Yurtseven). True shooting % accounts for his shot selection (which is not good), his 3p shooting (which is not good), and his FT's (which are good).

Screenshot_20200514-125809_Chrome.jpg
 
Last edited:
#256
#256
Anyone else see McClung as a 1 year guy. I think the only way he stays 2 years is if he has to sit next season.
 
#259
#259
I think most years MM would be a take for UT. He has some talent and can be a really good college player imo. Next year and the tear after though are not most years for UT. I think we have accumulated the best and deepest guard talent we may have ever had. Just don’t see a Role for him this year or likely the one following.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Dog
#260
#260
n_huffhines said:
He doesn't do anything other than score and he scores with very poor efficiency.

.393 FG%
.456 2P%
.295 3P%

That's atrocious. It's weird that he's such a good FT shooter and can't shoot 3's well, so maybe he'll come around, but as it stands, he's proven he sucks.
Click to expand...
Many times that situation is due to shot selection. That is where you need analytics. What was his 3pt % when uncontested, feet set?
 
#262
#262
therickbol said:
Many times that situation is due to shot selection. That is where you need analytics. What was his 3pt % when uncontested, feet set?
Click to expand...

Sure, but changing a guy's habits and shot selection is much easier said than done. If he completely changes his ways, then great. People want him because he's a shot creator, and that's what he thinks he is, so turning him into a 3 and D guy (who doesn't play great D) probably isn't likely.
 
Last edited:
#264
#264
hep said:
He’s also way more athletic than Marshall Henderson.
Click to expand...

Henderson was really hard to shut down when his 3 was dropping. But both are white, offensive oriented, high volume shooters, high energy players that defenses have to chase all over the place, generate a ton of excitement, and aren't the least bit introverted on the court. Everybody in the building knows who they are and when they're in the game. Henderson would get off his 3s from nearly anywhere after crossing half court. They are far from identical, but have some similarities.
 
#266
#266
I wonder if Rex Chapman from KY 30+ years ago is a valid comparison? RC was a white guy that could leap out of the gym. Their shooting frequency is similar, but Rex was more accurate. I don't remember, but Chapman could have been a pretty good defender. White guys that can jump though... not Woody Harrelsons.
 
#269
#269
I’d think there are situations that are better for him especially if he wants to play next year
 
#275
#275
jmva1 said:
While he may have been just a 3 star recruit, he was one of the most popular and well known recruits in the nation. Between being a small white guy who can dunk like that and his cousin being a famous rapper, he had many viral moments before even getting to Georgetown. He has a lengthy Wikipedia page which is evidence of how well known he’s been.

That being said, as a program we’ve kind of shoehorned ourselves into a certain kind of recruit: a kid that is extremely religious. To a man, every single player on the team is devoutly religious. Outside of basketball, it’s the one joining force on the team. Since Barnes has taken over religion and faith has played a big role in the team. For example Kyle Alexander and Bowden being baptized mid season, and every players social media displaying how important their faith is. It’s not a bad thing, as it’s made for a very mature and high character team, but limits us in the guys we can target to guys who are religious (and it shows in the guys we recruit).
Click to expand...

True?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top