Why slow it down????

#201
#201
Spartacavolus said:
Your opinion is fine. Your evidence is squat. We'll see where we are at the end of the year and how we get there.
And also, going to the post in your words has nothing to do with pace. Its when and where you get it to him. With us, stokes likes to get down and pin his man before his man and the d can get set. A big part of pushing the pace is to get it to him early in the shot clock when he has his best position and no immediate defensive help coming. Seems you may be confusing pushing pace with Nolan Richardson.
Click to expand...

And your lack of evidence is squat. All you are giving me is opinion, opinion, opinion while you give me nothing to back up your claim. Absolutely nothing other than "I know this team extremely well...etc etc etc".

Since when did Jarnell like to run? I've watched every single Jarnell game and while he can do that, he doesn't really like to. That's why he's the last one back. Jarnell actually likes to get the ball on pick and rolls where he can use his 260 lb frame going and won't get doubled. Jarnell commented multiple times playing for Billy Donovan about playing in the pick and roll spread system.

The best way to get Jarnell the ball is to run screens with him. Our post offense would be excellent if we had guys that could properly cut and knew spacing.

I do agree with you on Maymon. He likes to face up. I wouldn't use him so much on the low block, although he can play there. There was no high post game with Maymon and Stokes last night.
 
#202
#202
jjay2518 said:
So it seems like the entire premise of your argument can be summed up with "because I say so"
Click to expand...



Did you just now figure out this is an opinion board? Does anyone giving an opinion not believe they are right?

The answer is yes anyway and if you want to talk about number of possessions being solely dictated by pace then revert back to the multiple basic questions I posed that render such assertion as misinformed and useless.
 
#203
#203
zjcvols said:
And your lack of evidence is squat. All you are giving me is opinion, opinion, opinion while you give me nothing to back up your claim. Absolutely nothing other than "I know this team extremely well...etc etc etc".

Since when did Jarnell like to run? I've watched every single Jarnell game and while he can do that, he doesn't really like to. That's why he's the last one back. Jarnell actually likes to get the ball on pick and rolls where he can use his 260 lb frame going and won't get doubled. Jarnell commented multiple times playing for Billy Donovan about playing in the pick and roll spread system.

The best way to get Jarnell the ball is to run screens with him. Our post offense would be excellent if we had guys that could properly cut and knew spacing.

I do agree with you on Maymon. He likes to face up. I wouldn't use him so much on the low block, although he can play there. There was no high post game with Maymon and Stokes last night.
Click to expand...


You or bto ask him if he likes to get down and pin his man early for an easy bucket and if he likes to face the basket or have his back to it rather than argue with me. Don't you guys have access?
As far as pick and roll, agree 100%. Amazed we don't clear out one side and do it quite often. Probably a stat for it that shows its a bad idea.
 
#204
#204
Jarnell hates being double teamed. Point to you both. I hope he learns to use double teams to expose weaknesses in D. I'm hoping Maymon and that interior passing serves as an outlet again.
 
#205
#205
zjcvols said:
Sparty, you allege when we went to the four guard lineup, we started to "push the pace" more, which led to our winning ways second half of conference play. I decided to look at the final sixteen games of the year when we went on a very nice 11-6 run. The first seventeen games we were 10-7. I decided to compare that to our possessions before that.

First 17: Average of 64 possessions per game

Next 16 (excluding TAMU) games: Average of 62 possessions per game

I looked at our final 12 games on our 9-3 run. Taking out TAMU.

Average of possessions on 9-3 run in final 12 games: 63

Average of possesssions of our first 21 games when we were 12-10: 64

Finally, I decided to look at strictly SEC games for possessions. Again, we take out TAMU.

Average of possessions in losses: 66.2

Average of possessions in wins: 61

Admit it Sparty. You are wrong.
Click to expand...
I might buy your argument Z but for one problem.
There is virtually no difference in a 66 or 61 possession game.
You aren't really pushing pace until you're playing like Holy Cross at about 85.9 per game.
Any stats on possessions in our exhibition games this season?
 
#206
#206
I am back and loaded for bear!

Last night my OP stated we wanted to be over the 130 total point mark and I have done more research why:

We played 10games last year that were under 130 total pts.

Georgetown
Virginia
Xavier
Oklahoma state
Bama x2
Vandy x2
Ole miss
WSU

We went 5-5
There was a 58.5 possession per game AVE

We shot 37.6% on average
Our defense gave up 38.5% on FGs



The rest of our games(excluding A&M) were over the 130 total:

We went 14-8 in those games.

64.6 was the average possessions per game

We shot 48.6% in those games

We gave up 46% of our FGs




Clearly the average of possessions per game went up with the score.

Clearly our FG% went up along with the pace and scoring

Clearly our defense wasn't as good


CLEARLY WE WON MORE GAMES WHEN ALL THOSE THINGS WENT UP!!!
 
Last edited:
#207
#207
calban said:
I might buy your argument Z but for one problem.
There is virtually no difference in a 66 or 61 possession game.
You aren't really pushing pace until you're playing like Holy Cross at about 85.9 per game.
Any stats on possessions in our exhibition games this season?
Click to expand...

There is a slight difference, but not a huge one. My point was no uptick in possessions per game.

I did not see, but I bet it would be up.
 
#208
#208
BruinVol said:
I am back and loaded for bear!

Last night my OP stated we wanted to be over the 130 total point mark and I have done more research why:

We played 10games last year that were under 130 total pts.

Georgetown
Virginia
Xavier
Oklahoma state
Bama x2
Vandy x2
Ole miss
WSU

We went 5-5
There was a 58.5 possession per game AVE

We shot 37.6% on average
Our defense gave up 38.5% on FGs



The rest of our games(excluding A&M) were over the 130 total:

We went 14-8 in those games.

64.6 was the average possessions per game

We shot 48.6% in those games

We gave up 46% of our FGs




Clearly the average of possessions per game went up with the score.

Clearly our FG% went up along with the pace and scoring

Clearly our defense wasn't as good


CLEARLY WE WON MORE GAMES WHEN ALL THOSE THINGS WENT UP!!!
Click to expand...


I'm not sure this is conclusive evidence that proves anything. In those eight losses what what was the average number of possessions? Why 130 combined points? Ole Miss beat us down twice and their was a clear uptick of possessions for us.
 
#209
#209
BruinVol said:
I am back and loaded for bear!

Last night my OP stated we wanted to be over the 130 total point mark and I have done more research why:

We played 10games last year that were under 130 total pts.

Georgetown
Virginia
Xavier
Oklahoma state
Bama x2
Vandy x2
Ole miss
WSU

We went 5-5
There was a 58.5 possession per game AVE

We shot 37.6% on average
Our defense gave up 38.5% on FGs



The rest of our games(excluding A&M) were over the 130 total:

We went 14-8 in those games.

64.6 was the average possessions per game

We shot 48.6% in those games

We gave up 46% of our FGs




Clearly the average of possessions per game went up with the score.

Clearly our FG% went up along with the pace and scoring

Clearly our defense wasn't as good


CLEARLY WE WON MORE GAMES WHEN ALL THOSE THINGS WENT UP!!!
Click to expand...

You are going to get destroyed on this one, rightfully so.

....
 
#210
#210
zjcvols said:
I'm not sure this is conclusive evidence that proves anything. In those eight losses what what was the average number of possessions? Why 130 combined points? Ole Miss beat us down twice and their was a clear uptick of possessions for us.
Click to expand...

Pretty overwhelming evidence if you ask me.
Clearly we want and need scoring over 130 pts and I proved possessions per game are directly connected to that.

The first ole miss game is what slants the overall average so much on the loses. If you took it away(76) there would be a big overall difference.
 
#213
#213
BruinVol said:
Pretty overwhelming evidence if you ask me.
Clearly we want and need scoring over 130 pts and I proved possessions per game are directly connected to that.

The first ole miss game is what slants the overall average so much on the loses. If you took it away(76) there would be a big overall difference.
Click to expand...

Bruin.

I took the ten games you provided me for the >130 and the other 22 games you provided me for the <130.

This is what I came with.

The ten games under 130 points: 63.9 possessions on average

The twenty-two games over 130 points: 63.9 possessions on average
 
#214
#214
zjcvols said:
Bruin.

I took the ten games you provided me for the >130 and the other 22 games you provided me for the <130.

This is what I came with.

The ten games under 130 points: 63.9

The twenty-two games over 130 points: 63.9
Click to expand...


Georgetown 53
Virginia 56
Xavier 63
OSU 62
Vandy 56
Bama 55
Bama 55
Vandy 57
Ole miss 68
WSU 63


Those not your numbers??

You might have used the higher scoring ole miss game?
 
Last edited:
#215
#215
Whoops.

I accidentally put the wrong data!

Let me restate. This was calculated for the over 130 points

In our 14 wins, our number of possessions 63.9

In our 8 losses, our number of possessions 63.9

My point the other 22 games (which is a larger sample size than 10 games) showed that we didn't push the pace more in our wins.
 
#216
#216
zjcvols said:
Whoops.

I accidentally put the wrong data!

Let me restate. This was calculated for the over 130 points

In our 14 wins, our number of possessions 63.9

In our 8 losses, our number of possessions 63.9

My point the other 22 games (which is a larger sample size than 10 games) showed that we didn't push the pace more in our wins.
Click to expand...

130 appears to be a big number.

I am doing the other year now.


What's your response to the FG %???
 
#218
#218
Bruin, I did the possessions for our wins and losses excluding TAMU

Wins: 62.6

Losses: 62

No correlation that possessions matter in our wins and losses overall.
 
#219
#219
zjcvols said:
There is a slight difference, but not a huge one. My point was no uptick in possessions per game.

I did not see, but I bet it would be up.
Click to expand...
Gotcha.
Then you have LSU that had 84 possessions in their first game, scored 90 points and lost.
Really comes down to possession efficiency on both ends.
No matter how many.
 
#220
#220
Georgetown and Virginia were both in the top twelve nationally in points per possession allowed. Wichita State was 43rd.
 
#221
#221
calban said:
Gotcha.
Then you have LSU that had 84 possessions in their first game, scored 90 points and lost.
Really comes down to possession efficiency on both ends.
No matter how many.
Click to expand...

This is also true.
 
#222
#222
That you are still debating whether number of possessions is a good measure for pushing the pace is a joke, really. I gave you guys a dozen or so examples as to why it isn't. Sometimes learning something new isn't a bad thing, even if you've had your mind set all day that possession #'s are a good measure for attacking the rim early and hard.
 
#223
#223
2 years ago we were 7-8 in games under 130 total points.

Possessions per game were 63 which is nearly 4 under the seasons average.
 
#224
#224
Spartacavolus said:
That you are still debating whether number of possessions is a good measure for pushing the pace is a joke, really. I gave you guys a dozen or so examples as to why it isn't. Sometimes learning something new isn't a bad thing, even if you've had your mind set all day that possession #'s are a good measure for attacking the rim early and hard.
Click to expand...

You've state your opinion. We both believe you are wrong. So why interject about a stat you think is worthless anyways when nobody brought you back up other than to be argumentative? :hi:
 
#225
#225
zjcvols said:
My point the other 22 games (which is a larger sample size than 10 games) showed that we didn't push the pace more in our wins.
Click to expand...

You ask for a bigger sample size so here it is.

2yrs we have played 25 games that were under 130pts.

We went 12-13 with 61.2(well below average)possessions per game.

Clearly we want games over 130 and need more pace!!
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top