Why slow it down????

#27
#27
Good post, Bruin. Have not done the stats like you, which is appreciated, but have observed the team played better at an uptempo. If you have sound D, there is absolutely zero reason not to play at an uptempo.

I realize we have a HC that is still growing into his role. However, he has been a basketball player, assistant coach and head coach over 20+ years that has competed at a high level for all of that time. He should know this and do something about it without it having it pointed out to him. If the HC will not adapt his style to fit his roster after numerous attempts to have his roster change to his philosophy unsuccessfully, we have trouble in paradise. And losses. And no berth in the NCAA's. Every game matters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#28
#28
BruinVol said:
We are 21-8 when either team scores 70 or more.

So why do we need the "game in the 60's"????
Click to expand...

You don't. I agree with you Bruin. I've been saying the same thing for a few days now. Martin needs to turn them loose and let them run and gun. They are much more relaxed playing that way. They are much better in one on ones that in a crowd.
 
Last edited:
#29
#29
BigOrangeD said:
You don't. I agree with you Bruin. I've saying the same thing for a few days now. Martin needs to turn them loose and let them run and gun. They are much more relaxed playing that way. They are much better in one on ones that in a crowd.
Click to expand...

With the addition of Barton I have to think we are going to routinely see games in the 70s maybe even the 80s.

The numbers prove that's what we need
 
#30
#30
BruinVol said:
With the addition of Barton I have to think we are going to routinely see games in the 70s maybe even the 80s.

The numbers prove that's what we need
Click to expand...

Yep. When they play uptempo, they seem to find a rhythm and shoot better not to mention they can beat most guys down the court and shoot without someone all over them.
 
#31
#31
BigOrangeD said:
Yep. When they play uptempo, they seem to find a rhythm and shoot better
Click to expand...

Thats the point I was trying to make to bto last night. The total score averages over the course of 2 plus years tell us a lot. We don't need to look at shooting % because they certainly are effected by a team playing in or out of rythm
 
#32
#32
BigOrangeD said:
Yep. When they play uptempo, they seem to find a rhythm and shoot better not to mention they can beat most guys down the court and shoot without someone all over them.
Click to expand...


because they aren't robotic and overthinking. Basketball is about confidence, flow and rhythm for scorers and it appears that we do all we can to go against what offenses and scorers prefer.
 
#33
#33
BruinVol said:
Bto,

Your a smart basketball guy.

If there is a 19 pt gap in winning and losing it means something when considering 2 yrs worth of data.

That's plenty enough games to make the averages reliable
Click to expand...

Bruin again I'm not disagreeing, I think it's pretty common knowledge the more you score the better your chances of winning are typically.

My question wasn't sarcasm, I was honestly asking if you saw the numbers I had pulled. When we shoot 40+% from 3 in a game we are 20-2 and when we have <12 turnovers we are 20-3.....we did both of those of Tuesday night.
 
#34
#34
bleedingTNorange said:
Bruin again I'm not disagreeing, I think it's pretty common knowledge the more you score the better your chances of winning are typically.

My question wasn't sarcasm, I was honestly asking if you saw the numbers I had pulled. When we shoot 40+% from 3 in a game we are 20-2 and when we have <12 turnovers we are 20-3.....we did both of those of Tuesday night.
Click to expand...

I agree if I was only looking at our score the numbers would mean little but I have looked at much more.

The higher Total score the more we win!

When either team scores 70 the more we win.

That HAS to mean a lot
 
#35
#35
BruinVol said:
Thats the point I was trying to make to bto last night. The total score averages over the course of 2 plus years tell us a lot. We don't need to look at shooting % because they certainly are effected by a team playing in or out of rythm
Click to expand...

You really don't understand what I'm saying about points per game and possessions per game do you?
 
#36
#36
BruinVol said:
I agree if I was only looking at our score the numbers would mean little but I have looked at much more.

The higher Total score the more we win!

When either team scores 70 the more we win.

That HAS to mean a lot
Click to expand...

Yes it means the more we score the better our chances of winning are....I bet our record when we score 80+ is pretty damn good too isn't it?
 
Last edited:
#37
#37
We scored 43 points in the second half, so offensively we picked things up it would appear, heck that's on pace for 86 points on the game.

The issue was though, and why Martin hesitates to want games high scoring, was that Xavier scored 40 points and shot 56% in the second half. That is god awful defense, and the very reason Martin gives for why he doesn't run more.
 
#38
#38
bleedingTNorange said:
You really don't understand what I'm saying about points per game and possessions per game do you?
Click to expand...

What are you trying to suggest about this stat???


We are 20-8 when EITHER team scores 70 or more.

That clearly shows we should want games in the 70's.
 
#39
#39
bleedingTNorange said:
We scored 43 points in the second half, so offensively we picked things up it would appear, heck that's on pace for 86 points on the game.

The issue was though, and why Martin hesitates to want games high scoring, was that Xavier scored 40 points and shot 56% in the second half. That is god awful defense, and the very reason Martin gives for why he doesn't run more.
Click to expand...

We WON that half 43-40.


We LOSTthe first half 27-20.


Which one you prefer???


You just made my point
 
#40
#40
BruinVol said:
What are you trying to suggest about this stat???


We are 20-8 when EITHER team scores 70 or more.

That clearly shows we should want games in the 70's.
Click to expand...

Your initial post talks about increasing tempo, and playing uptempo.....my point is scoring more points doesn't always mean that you're playing more uptempo.

The only stat that proves you're playing more uptempo is possessions per game, and you didn't provide that stat. I think it's pretty common knowledge though the more you score the higher your chances of winning are, no?
 
#41
#41
bleedingTNorange said:
I think it's pretty common knowledge though the more you score the higher your chances of winning are, no?
Click to expand...

I have given plenty of data that looks at what BOTH teams score. If you want to ignore the fact that we are a much better team when BOTH teams score more points then you are just as stubborn as half season martin is.

Perhaps success in this game isn't as tied to defense as many want to make it

20-8 when EITHER team scores 70 or more points suggest offense is more important.


If you choose to believe that shooting % isn't directly effected by teams playing in or out of a flow then you aren't near as knowledgeable about hoops are you try to act on here.
 
#42
#42
bto, I feel like you guys are semantic'ing each other to death. You know as well as anybody here that this particular group of players would win more games pushing the pace and attacking vs a halfcourt standing around offense. pts per possession, points given up, turnovers, assists, whatever else can be brought up really doesn't matter when you get down to winning and losing. Run and win. Halfcourt and lose.
 
#43
#43
BruinVol said:
We WON that half 43-40.


We LOSTthe first half 27-20.


Which one you prefer???


You just made my point
Click to expand...

Why are you acting like anyone is arguing with you about this? Yes, people can watch and see that the offense flows better when we're up tempo. However, points per game is only a slightly more reliable predictor of pace of play than something as subjective as watching and getting a feeling. Your premise is most likely right, but the best way to make your point would be to correlate possessions per game.
 
#44
#44
BruinVol said:
We WON that half 43-40.


We LOSTthe first half 27-20.


Which one you prefer???


You just made my point
Click to expand...

I think it's a bit naive of you to think the final 3 minutes would've played out the same way over the course of another 20 minute half, but that's another story.

Xavier had outscored us in the second half until there was 1:30 left to play in the game, thats when we started hoisting 3s and they were clanging ft, so no I dont think that proves your point.
 
#45
#45
BruinVol said:
I have given plenty of data that looks at what BOTH teams score. If you want to ignore the fact that we are a much better team when BOTH teams score more points then you are just as stubborn as half season martin is.

Perhaps success in this game isn't as tied to defense as many want to make it

20-8 when EITHER team scores 70 or more points suggest offense is more important.


If you choose to believe that shooting % isn't directly effected by teams playing in or out of a flow then you aren't near as knowledgeable about hoops are you try to act on here.
Click to expand...

Did we play night and day, more uptempo in the second half? Or would you say we played at a pretty similar pace in the second half as we did the first.
 
#46
#46
Spartacavolus said:
Run and win. Halfcourt and lose.
Click to expand...

The stats I have shown prove just that.


Also we are going to out talent nearly all of our opponents. If that's the case then we should do nothing but let the talent dictate the outcome. Slowing the game into a half court game is the method used when you are overmatched IMO.
 
#47
#47
bleedingTNorange said:
Did we play night and day, more uptempo in the second half? Or would you say we played at a pretty similar pace in the second half as we did the first.
Click to expand...

We played much faster with Barton in the game IMO.

He played mostly the entire second half.

Regardless one game isn't enough data to consider but 2 years Is more than enough
 
#48
#48
Good post. Martin is a GREAT basketball mind. So was Buzz Peterson.

The problem is that kids want to run and they don't want to slow it down. And neither do the fans. Our fan base doesn't really know good basketball when we see it. It's just the truth. We are driven by excitement. This grind-it-out style is a style the Big 10 loves and appreciates.

I've always felt that Martin would struggle here for that very reason. Tennessee doesn't connect with this slow it down, fundamentally sound, style of ball. Martin will do great when Purdue finally hires him back. He can recruit, he understands the game, and he gets Big 10 culture.
 
#49
#49
BruinVol said:
We played much faster with Barton in the game IMO.

He played mostly the entire second half.

Regardless one game isn't enough data to consider but 2 years Is more than enough
Click to expand...


Do you clearly understand who the opponent was Tuesday night?
 
#50
#50
Spartacavolus said:
bto, I feel like you guys are semantic'ing each other to death. You know as well as anybody here that this particular group of players would win more games pushing the pace and attacking vs a halfcourt standing around offense. pts per possession, points given up, turnovers, assists, whatever else can be brought up really doesn't matter when you get down to winning and losing. Run and win. Halfcourt and lose.
Click to expand...

We put up 43 points in the second half and were still outscored, that's 86 points on the game. I'm not sure how many points people expect us to score, but now we're saying what, 90+?

This reminds me of the beginning of Martin's first season. We went out and tried to run, we were putting up points against Memphis, Duke, Oakland, Austin Peay.....one problem though, they were putting up more points than we were.

I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but Martin has flat out said, he will push it so long as it doesn't hurt his defense....we all know he's defense first. I could care less if we run or not, I just want to win, 21-20 is fine by me so long as we have 21.

I doubt Wisconsin fans were complaining about beating Florida the other night, even though they only scored in the 50s.
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top