67-60. UConn may end up ranked #1 by default.

Fun game to watch. Jeffy got the intentional foul call.....

It's a curse to be ranked in the top 2.

I called it this morning to my wife haha I just knew they would lose to an unranked team

DanaDane said:

---

There are 8 teams that could win it all this year. There is not much separation, at this point, of any of the 8. All have an easily identifiable weakness that can be exploited in a one game matchup.

---

True, True

It's always true, but this year Timing and Matchups will play a much larger role than normal.

So you are saying that the Longhornettes do not have a chance ?

UL 5 -17 threes 29.4%

OSU 6-19 threes 31.6%

What do you think it shows concerning the evolution of the game today?

Eball said:

---

UL 5 -17 threes 29.4%

OSU 6-19 threes 31.6%

What do you think it shows concerning the evolution of the game today?

---

For one thing = It shows that if you rely on the three you can count on making an average of approx 3 out of 10 shots. Gamblers only remember when they win. 3 point advocates remember the game when some team went off the charts for a 50% average and beat somebody they weren't supposed to.

geewago said:

---

Eball said:

---

UL 5 -17 threes 29.4%

OSU 6-19 threes 31.6%

What do you think it shows concerning the evolution of the game today?

---

For one thing = It shows that if you rely on the three you can count on making an average of approx. 3 out of 10 shots. Gamblers only remember when they win. 3 point advocates remember the game when some team went off the charts for a 50% average and beat somebody they weren't supposed to.

---

We 3 point advocates as you say actually staunchly advocate defending the arc instead of letting proven high percentage 3 ball shooters have an open look because were dropping off them to help in the paint and cant get back in time to contest the shot. Big difference between jacking up threes in volume (hence the one in three stat) and shooting open or barely contested threes. ND, Oregon, UL, OSU and others use screens to bump off the defender to create space to jack up a 3 - makes for a rushed shot and lower % makes. Watch the Robertson kid from Oklahoma, Remember Emily Nieman - that's the higher percentage three ball shot we 3 point advocates are posting about.

It is obvious that a good 3 point shooter can hit at a fairly high percentage if they are not being guarded. When someone is always in their face and keeping them off balance their percentages go way down. I have watched our girls shoot as high as 8 out of 10 during warm ups. Yet they never do that in a game. Those who want to "live by the three" seem to be mainly speaking of shooting (offense) the three.

I didn't realize that a person who believes in good defense on the arc to prevent threes from being made would be classified as a "3 point advocate". I was thinking more in the offensive mode. Obviously 3 point defense is an absolute necessity in beating most top 10 teams.

Those of you who want Mulkey to shoot more threes need to have a good long persuasive talk with her. She has never been one to put very many of her eggs in that basket. I personally wish we were stronger in that area. But it's just never been her style. I really wish more emphasis would be put on free throw shooting as well. It's always amazed me how BU leads the Big 12 virtually every year in most statistics. But never in free throw percentage. It's funny how so many 3 star recruits can shoot free throws better than most 5 stars can. Mulkey has said that you really can't teach somebody to shoot better free throws, they have to perfect that themselves. And there's quite a bit of truth to that. But there's so many associate coaches on the bench who also have associate associates under them that you'd think one of them might could specialize in that. Oh well- just a dream.

geewago said:

---

Mulkey has said that you really can't teach somebody to shoot better free throws, they have to perfect that themselves.

---

All shooters, particularly those from distance, tend to shoot better percentages when they feel encouraged to shoot open shots without hesitation. Landrum, for instance, is one of the best outside shooters we have had in the Lady Bear program, but I note that she rarely shoots unless she is wide open, despite having a relatively quick release and the athleticism to clear herself for looks at the basket. Far too many times she has had open looks and passed them up to pass the ball to a teammate, sometimes resulting in a far less satisfactory shot than the one she failed to take.

As we have seen, long shots often mean long rebounds when missed, so the opportunities for second shots will be there. I think that Landrum should be taking her shot more regularly and establishing a rhythm, particularly in the absence of a dominant inside presence. Cooper falls into that category as well, as she has the same kind of athleticism as Landrum and a fine three point shot.

Bickle and Ursin are capable, but come off the bench, so their shooting may be more situational, but I see nothing wrong with 10 to 15 three point shots a game if they are there to be taken. Misses which produce good rebounding opportunities make the shots less unproductive than the statistics might indicate, but in any event they should open up opportunities for penetration and for passes into the post which are less contested.

The number and nature of the three point shots are dictated to some extent by opportunity and by need, but like the dunk in the men's game, the psychological effect of successful three point shots produces timeouts and adjustments by opponents. A team which does not have to prepare to defend the three point line, everything else being equal or close to that, has a major advantage on the defensive end of the floor, as the offensive team cannot spread the floor to open up room for penetration or for largely unimpeded passes into the post players.

I would agree, however, with the contention that a percentage below 33% beyond the arc can be detrimental to a team's chances for victory unless there is a large disparity elsewhere on the floor. Our unwillingness to use games against weak opponents to polish our three point shooting and increase the confidence of those employing it has always intrigued me, as it seems to me to be at least as useful as continuing to use our inside game almost solely to score against small, out manned lineups. I am referring to the practice of interior players looking to reverse the ball or to acquire the capacity to recognize double teams and know immediately where to go with the ball.

These games should be practice oriented, since victory is never in doubt, no matter who is playing or how we scheme for them. This has been discussed many times over the years by various posters, often to the chagrin of Mulkey fans who take it as a complaint about her as a coach. It has rarely been meant in that way. as I understand it, but merely an observation and an inquiry by those who know the Lady Bear schemes and propose situational alternatives.

As I have mentioned before, one of the few players Mulkey has had who seemed to play with a license to shoot the three at almost every opportunity was her daughter. McKenzie was a very good, if not an elite three point shooter, but certainly no more so than several others we have had, including the current ones mentioned above, but for whatever reason her comfort zone for launching from deep was greater than that of most of the other long range shooters we have had, and it often produced satisfactory results.

setshot said:

---

one of the few players Mulkey has had who seemed to play with a license to shoot the three at almost every opportunity was her daughter. McKenzie was a very good, if not an elite three point shooter, but certainly no more so than several others we have had, including the current ones

---

Makenzie Robertson Senior Year Statistics 2013-14
https://baylorbears.com/documents/2014/3/31/_bay_w_baskbl_2013_14_stats__season_stats.pdf

When it comes to 3 pt shooters we also need to differentiate between on ball shooters and those that excel in "catch and shoot". The " catch and shoot " is a specific skill when utilized properly can really open up the offense. On most teams, you will see a player positioned in the corner. The effectiveness of that corner will dictate how close a defender can play off of them to help protect the driving lanes.

There are basically three things that will dictate how effective a corner shooter is. One- how consistent they can knock down those shots. Two - how well do the on-ball-players recognize and get the ball to the shooter when they are open. Three - how quick is their catch and shoot release. The quicker the release the smaller the shooting window needs to be and the closer the defender has to play them. If they are quick and effective enough they almost have to play them exclusively man to man. Another thing to add is how high is their release point. Usually the quicker the release the lower the release point becomes.

Up until this year, it has been difficult for those out of the area to catch no more than a few Nationally televised Baylor games and that certainly is not enough to get a real feel of Kims coaching philosophy. It does seem like she does not value the 3 point shot as much as many other coaches might. Probably because the 3 pt shot was not adopted by the college until the 86-87 season which was way after Kim's playing days were over. Their playing days do have an impact on many coaches for a variety of reasons. I could be mistaken but it does not seem to me that Kim ever really recruited or had a pure catch and shoot player on her team. By that I mean an elite level one.

I first began to recognize how important quick and high release points were watching high school girls basketball. I noticed that the higher the level of defenders were the quicker and higher the release points had to be. Many girls were very effective shooters on freshman and JV squads but when the got to the varsity they could never get their shots off. Players would have to adjust their speed and release points or not play. The same criteria applied to the various levels of varsity ball and also whenever they faced a higher level of opponent. Most players develop their shooting styles early on and once established it is hard to change. My notice early on of these things carried over so that I can not help but notice them at the college level.

I have noticed that more and more, players are developing much better techniques at an earlier age. One player that stood out for me was Kat Tudor who now plays for Oregon St. She came in as a freshman in high school with not only very quick but also a perfect form high release. In college, she was timed at around .43 seconds on her catch and shoot release. Her coach Scott Rueck has said because she has quick feet and adjusts them to shoot while the ball is still in flight. I have noticed that more players are coming into high school with similar skills sets. You put a shooter like that in the corner and it makes the defense adjust, much to the advantage of all the other players. Although not impossible, it is very difficult to turn a poor shooter into a good one after they reach college. There just is not that much time available to break old bad habits and replace them while also focusing on team and game needs. Of course, when recruiting shooters you also have to fisnd one that can play defense as well.

Kim is not the only coach who I feel has not made full use of an elite 3pt corner scoring threat in developing her offense.

Well done, willtalk, very useful analysis.

More than a few observers in recent years have observed that Stephen Curry has had a transformative impact on basketball as it is played at all levels. He is a far more physically gifted player than most people recognize, strong and extraordinarily coordinated. At 6'3" his lack of height in a big man's game enables aspiring young players to identify with him, and more than anyone else he extended the court area where the game is played. His accuracy (in games) is actually greater from beyond thirty two feet than it is from closer in.

There are many great shooters, now, more than there has been in previous years, though there have always been sharpshooters in the sport, but the difference is in the range of their shotmaking and the impact of that on the extension of the offense.

I have seen videos of Curry as a ten or twelve year old, and he even then he was an amazing shooter, but as you noted, to get the ball to the basket from the distances he shot from, he had to start the shot from the waist. When he reached his early teens, his father helped him reconstruct that shot so that he had a higher release.

Macio Teague, a fine marksman on the Baylor men's squad, has a rather low initial position in his form, but he compensates with a quick release at a close to normal height, thus verifying your analysis above.

Emily Niemann, who set a very high bar for all the perimeter shooters who came after her, was a bit reluctant to shoot from out there, even though she had picture perfect form and near-unlimited range. She had size, a strong undercarriage which enabled her to get the needed power from her legs and hips, and shoulders and arms in perfect alignment. Her brother was an All American pitcher for the Rice baseball team, and she probably matched him in dexterity from the elbow to the wrist. I have watched the best shooters that the game has produced and only Chris Mullin had similar form, and he was about as good as it gets in both form and results. If Emily was playing in today's game she would be the ideal catch and shoot wing player. If you could persuade her to do it, that is.

Because television and cable internet is so widely available, today's youngsters can watch a player like Curry and his basketball offspring and imitate them. Step back threes, threes off the dribble or the crossover moves, shots over and off of screens, and shots from long distance are no longer sometimes things, but are now normal elements in the arsenal of young outside players at all levels.

L.J. Cryer, for example, shoots nine to eleven threes on the average and hits 45% of them despite being the object of every opposing team's defense. He will arrive at Baylor next year with his basketball wardrobe packed with subtle moves and maneuvers that free him up to shoot from distance even though, like Curry, he does not possess jaw-dropping athleticism.

Oh, and by the way, Larry Bird could shoot the eyes out of the basket from almost any distance. He frustrated his coach who would let the team go earlier if someone hit the midcourt shot, something that Bird could do almost every time he let it fly from there. When he played, preCurry, it had not been imagined, much less done, as a regular feature of gametime activity, but everyone knows now that shooters can extend the range in the game the way it was once done in games of "horse." In fact, Juicy Landrum hits the midcourt shot in practice shoot-arounds regularly. Her range is about as great as anyone you will see.

slimecap said:

---

setshot said:

---

one of the few players Mulkey has had who seemed to play with a license to shoot the three at almost every opportunity was her daughter. McKenzie was a very good, if not an elite three point shooter, but certainly no more so than several others we have had, including the current ones

---

Makenzie Robertson Senior Year Statistics 2013-14
https://baylorbears.com/documents/2014/3/31/_bay_w_baskbl_2013_14_stats__season_stats.pdf

---

Interesting to look at those Stats and realize that we took as a team over 16 threes a game that year... the year between Griner and Brown...Sims took over 6 a game...I have often times posted that one of the reasons it may seem Kim does not like the three is because for 8 of the last ten years we have had Griner or Brown down low and when you have weapons like that you use them...any team would be a fool not to do so...

Eball said:

---

Interesting to look at those Stats and realize that we took as a team over 16 threes a game that year... the year between Griner and Brown...Sims took over 6 a game...I have often times posted that one of the reasons it may seem Kim does not like the three is because for 8 of the last ten years we have had Griner or Brown down low and when you have weapons like that you use them...any team would be a fool not to do so...

---

In my post, I was referring specifically to the impact that an elite corner catch and release shooter can have on the offense. Sims was a ball-dominant high shot volume scorer in college. Kim showcased her for her senior year. It worked because it got her picked #2 in the WNBA draft. That sort of 3pt shooter is entirely different from a low volume catch and release corner shooter.

Kim meant well, but frankly, I thought it was a mistake. It was not in Sim's best long term interests. Except for prestige, salary-wise all the rookies get paid the same their first few years so it doesn't really matter how high you are drafted. Ball dominant high volume scorers usually have a difficult adjustment period in the WNBA where they have to learn to play off the ball. It took Sims until her first year with LA to make the adjustment which bore fruit at Minni. with her first All-Star selection. Being picked #2 might have helped her get an initially larger overseas contract, however, her first season in the WNBA also plays into that and it was not that stellar.

Naturally, it makes sense when you have a dominate post that you would make them the focus of the offense. Utilizing an elite corner catch and shoot player would not change that, rather it would complement the inside game. The function of a corner shooter is less to score a lot of points, rather it is to spread the defense which only makes the posts more effective. An elite corner shooter is the ultimate zone buster as well. This also helps post play.

One of the problems with establishing the corner threat is that you have to have a really good catch and release shooter. Teams that are post dominated offenses often find it hard to attract good off ball shooters. California was an example of that. They ran their entire offense around Anigwe and every Cal fan will tell you it was very predictable and stale. Even an elite post is more effective when complemented with other offensive options. Having a corner shooter would only have a positive impact on a post centered offense.

willtalk said:

---

Eball said:

---

Interesting to look at those Stats and realize that we took as a team over 16 threes a game that year... the year between Griner and Brown...Sims took over 6 a game...I have often times posted that one of the reasons it may seem Kim does not like the three is because for 8 of the last ten years we have had Griner or Brown down low and when you have weapons like that you use them...any team would be a fool not to do so...

---

In my post, I was referring specifically to the impact that an elite corner catch and release shooter can have on the offense. Sims was a ball-dominant high shot volume scorer in college. Kim showcased her for her senior year. It worked because it got her picked #2 in the WNBA draft. That sort of 3pt shooter is entirely different from a low volume catch and release corner shooter.

Kim meant well, but frankly, I thought it was a mistake. It was not in Sim's best long term interests. Except for prestige, salary-wise all the rookies get paid the same their first few years so it doesn't really matter how high you are drafted. Ball dominant high volume scorers usually have a difficult adjustment period in the WNBA where they have to learn to play off the ball. It took Sims until her first year with LA to make the adjustment which bore fruit at Minni. with her first All-Star selection. Being picked #2 might have helped her get an initially larger overseas contract, however, her first season in the WNBA also plays into that and it was not that stellar.

Naturally, it makes sense when you have a dominate post that you would make them the focus of the offense. Utilizing an elite corner catch and shoot player would not change that, rather it would complement the inside game. The function of a corner shooter is less to score a lot of points, rather it is to spread the defense which only makes the posts more effective. An elite corner shooter is the ultimate zone buster as well. This also helps post play.

One of the problems with establishing the corner threat is that you have to have a really good catch and release shooter. Teams that are post dominated offenses often find it hard to attract good off ball shooters. California was an example of that. They ran their entire offense around Anigwe and every Cal fan will tell you it was very predictable and stale. Even an elite post is more effective when complemented with other offensive options. Having a corner shooter would only have a positive impact on a post centered offense.

---

How would you describe our end of quarter offense we run with a dribbler up high then the screen domes late. Do we not position catch and shoot three point shooters in both corners ?

Eball said:

---

willtalk said:

---

Eball said:

---

Interesting to look at those Stats and realize that we took as a team over 16 threes a game that year... the year between Griner and Brown...Sims took over 6 a game...I have often times posted that one of the reasons it may seem Kim does not like the three is because for 8 of the last ten years we have had Griner or Brown down low and when you have weapons like that you use them...any team would be a fool not to do so...

---

In my post, I was referring specifically to the impact that an elite corner catch and release shooter can have on the offense. Sims was a ball-dominant high shot volume scorer in college. Kim showcased her for her senior year. It worked because it got her picked #2 in the WNBA draft. That sort of 3pt shooter is entirely different from a low volume catch and release corner shooter.

Kim meant well, but frankly, I thought it was a mistake. It was not in Sim's best long term interests. Except for prestige, salary-wise all the rookies get paid the same their first few years so it doesn't really matter how high you are drafted. Ball dominant high volume scorers usually have a difficult adjustment period in the WNBA where they have to learn to play off the ball. It took Sims until her first year with LA to make the adjustment which bore fruit at Minni. with her first All-Star selection. Being picked #2 might have helped her get an initially larger overseas contract, however, her first season in the WNBA also plays into that and it was not that stellar.

Naturally, it makes sense when you have a dominate post that you would make them the focus of the offense. Utilizing an elite corner catch and shoot player would not change that, rather it would complement the inside game. The function of a corner shooter is less to score a lot of points, rather it is to spread the defense which only makes the posts more effective. An elite corner shooter is the ultimate zone buster as well. This also helps post play.

One of the problems with establishing the corner threat is that you have to have a really good catch and release shooter. Teams that are post dominated offenses often find it hard to attract good off ball shooters. California was an example of that. They ran their entire offense around Anigwe and every Cal fan will tell you it was very predictable and stale. Even an elite post is more effective when complemented with other offensive options. Having a corner shooter would only have a positive impact on a post centered offense.

---

How would you describe our end of quarter offense we run with a dribbler up high then the screen domes late. Do we not position catch and shoot three point shooters in both corners ?

---

Those players are put on the corners to create more driving lane space so the ball handler has the option of running down the clock while still leaving opportunity for shot creation in the short time left. That is the standard end of quarter tactics for most teams, but not something that is done throughout the game. Besides that, your catch and shoot player generally stays in one corner or the other and is not a ball handler. As I stated before it is usually effective if you have a really good catch and release player and I don't think Baylor really has one on the team. I gave you my criteria for what makes a really good catch and release shooter in my previous posts. Juicy is the closest there is, but you would not want her just stuck in the corner. She is more effective at the two. I have not watched Bickle enough to judge her release. They also need to be able to defend perimeter players.

willtalk said:

---

Eball said:

---

willtalk said:

---

Eball said:

---

Interesting to look at those Stats and realize that we took as a team over 16 threes a game that year... the year between Griner and Brown...Sims took over 6 a game...I have often times posted that one of the reasons it may seem Kim does not like the three is because for 8 of the last ten years we have had Griner or Brown down low and when you have weapons like that you use them...any team would be a fool not to do so...

---

In my post, I was referring specifically to the impact that an elite corner catch and release shooter can have on the offense. Sims was a ball-dominant high shot volume scorer in college. Kim showcased her for her senior year. It worked because it got her picked #2 in the WNBA draft. That sort of 3pt shooter is entirely different from a low volume catch and release corner shooter.

Kim meant well, but frankly, I thought it was a mistake. It was not in Sim's best long term interests. Except for prestige, salary-wise all the rookies get paid the same their first few years so it doesn't really matter how high you are drafted. Ball dominant high volume scorers usually have a difficult adjustment period in the WNBA where they have to learn to play off the ball. It took Sims until her first year with LA to make the adjustment which bore fruit at Minni. with her first All-Star selection. Being picked #2 might have helped her get an initially larger overseas contract, however, her first season in the WNBA also plays into that and it was not that stellar.

Naturally, it makes sense when you have a dominate post that you would make them the focus of the offense. Utilizing an elite corner catch and shoot player would not change that, rather it would complement the inside game. The function of a corner shooter is less to score a lot of points, rather it is to spread the defense which only makes the posts more effective. An elite corner shooter is the ultimate zone buster as well. This also helps post play.

One of the problems with establishing the corner threat is that you have to have a really good catch and release shooter. Teams that are post dominated offenses often find it hard to attract good off ball shooters. California was an example of that. They ran their entire offense around Anigwe and every Cal fan will tell you it was very predictable and stale. Even an elite post is more effective when complemented with other offensive options. Having a corner shooter would only have a positive impact on a post centered offense.

---

How would you describe our end of quarter offense we run with a dribbler up high then the screen domes late. Do we not position catch and shoot three point shooters in both corners ?

---

Those players are put on the corners to create more driving lane space so the ball handler has the option of running down the clock while still leaving opportunity for shot creation in the short time left. That is the standard end of quarter tactics for most teams, but not something that is done throughout the game. Besides that, your catch and shoot player generally stays in one corner or the other and is not a ball handler. As I stated before it is usually effective if you have a really good catch and release player and I don't think Baylor really has one on the team. I gave you my criteria for what makes a really good catch and release shooter in my previous posts. Juicy is the closest there is, but you would not want her just stuck in the corner. She is more effective at the two. I have not watched Bickle enough to judge her release. They also need to be able to defend perimeter players.

---

I was just trying to make the point that Kim does make use of the corner catch and shoot threes...maybe not as much as some would like but it is incorporated in the playbook. WE have several inbound plays where they run Juicy off screens to try and free her for a catch and shoot three. I am not sure if you are advocating some type of offense where the base set is someone just setting up in a corner...I don't know anyone who does that...they may have players who are very good three point shooters who will go to the corner but then move along the baseline to the other side when ball swings...certainly if you watch BU you will see in ball reversal someone going to the corner and or diving from the corner if the high post catches and faces the basket. I think Juicy, Moon, Tea and Bickle as well as Cox can ll effectively catch and shoot it and do...just not as much as some teams. While we have set plays to get a look at a three...I agree we do not have an offense designed to get a three it could be available as an option but it is not the option. Our half CRT set almost always involves High Low post action or wing pick and roll.