This is why Prohm must go........

  • After Iowa State won the Big 12, a Cyclone made a wonderful offer to We Will that now increases our match. Now all gifts up to $400,000 between now and the Final 4 will be matched. Please consider giving at We Will Collective.
    This notice can be dismissed using the upper right corner X button.

jsb

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 7, 2008
30,265
32,734
113
You said "but none of them are as bad as they've been". I question what you base that off of? What better indicator of what kind of 3 point shooter you are is there than how you shoot 3 point shots in a game?

I bet none of them will ever have a season where they shoot this bad. 3 for 22 is comically bad. The doofuses (said affectionately) shooting for the lawn mower aren’t that bad.

this is a BAD shooting team who now has zero confidence that any shot is going to go in. That turns a bad shooting team into a horrible shooting team. And that’s why prohm can’t just tell them to stop shooting. In order to have any chance to revert to the mean they’ve got to at least think the coach has their back.
 

FinalFourCy

Well-Known Member
Mar 5, 2017
9,357
9,145
113
39
The problem to me, if you move the 3 point line back with the goal of opening driving lanes, you need to widen the key. College is 12 feet wide, NBA is 16 feet. Still allowing post players to camp closer to the basket isn't gonna help open driving opportunities.
Regardless, if sub-33% 3P becomes the norm, the modern offense will become antiquated.

To your question, should that be the goal?
I’m agnostic.
 

megamanxzero35

Well-Known Member
May 31, 2011
2,524
719
113
Regardless, if sub-33% 3P becomes the norm, the modern offense will become antiquated.

To your question, should that be the goal?
I’m agnostic.
It will adjust over time. In 2008 they moved the line and percentages dropped and scoring dropped. Took a few seasons and then it rose to where it was higher than ever again. Now they moved it back again.

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketbal...-3-point-line-might-affect-college-basketball

Percentage-of-points.png


https://www.espn.com/mens-college-b...at-expect-college-basketball-new-3-point-line

Average and less effective shooters will be hit hardest

The share of Division I shot attempts that are launched from behind the 3-point line will in all probability drop this season, and a large part of that shift will be players (and coaches) saying no to shots from more than 22 feet out when those same shooters might have said yes from less than 21 feet.

The best and most confident outside shooters were, of course, already taking a healthy share of their attempts from beyond 22 feet even with the "old" line. Conversely, it's a given team's second and, especially, third, fourth and sometimes fifth perimeter options who will now be thinking twice about taking that 3.

With a new 3-point line for 2019-20, teams will have one more thing to think about, particularly early in the season. If history is any guide, however, the new line will soon be accepted, 3-point attempt rates will tick downward initially and then eventually resume their upward climb, and fans will quickly go back to arguing over whether a team should foul when up 3 in the closing seconds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VeloClone

CyTwins

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2010
80,179
65,788
113
Ankeny
I’m going to propose something absolutely crazy.

What if Prohm started the same guys that he believes are the best options for us at the end of close games, instead of falling behind 20 before putting in his best team?

It's pretty hard to determine who your best 5 will be until you see them play in the game. Then you ride the hot hands or in our case the not ice cold hands
 

bthebutcher

Well-Known Member
Sep 8, 2015
354
349
63
It's pretty hard to determine who your best 5 will be until you see them play in the game. Then you ride the hot hands or in our case the not ice cold hands
We know exactly what we're getting with 2 of the guys in the starting lineup. And it's been apparent for a while now.
 

isucy86

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2006
7,748
6,291
113
Dubuque
When Prohm moved Conditt into the starting line-up, it was the right decision to have Solo come off the bench. Both Jacobson and Young were playing at the same level offensively, but Jacobson was doing a better job on the boards.

Now that Conditt is starting, he is struggling. Now that Young is coming off the bench, he is on fire.

Prohm is in a difficult position because other than Halliburton, our top 6-7 guys are just average players who are inconsistent. I think the best Prohm can do is to start the hot hand from game to game. I would start Young & Lewis over Jacobson & Nixon.
 

CyTwins

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2010
80,179
65,788
113
Ankeny
When Prohm moved Conditt into the starting line-up, it was the right decision to have Solo come off the bench. Both Jacobson and Young were playing at the same level offensively, but Jacobson was doing a better job on the boards.

Now that Conditt is starting, he is struggling. Now that Young is coming off the bench, he is on fire.

Prohm is in a difficult position because other than Halliburton, our top 6-7 guys are just average players who are inconsistent. I think the best Prohm can do is to start the hot hand from game to game. I would start Young & Lewis over Jacobson & Nixon.

Bolton and Haliburton are our only two sure fire starters. After that it's almost a guessing game
 

Urbandale2013

Well-Known Member
Jan 28, 2018
4,285
5,264
113
29
Urbandale
When Prohm moved Conditt into the starting line-up, it was the right decision to have Solo come off the bench. Both Jacobson and Young were playing at the same level offensively, but Jacobson was doing a better job on the boards.

Now that Conditt is starting, he is struggling. Now that Young is coming off the bench, he is on fire.

Prohm is in a difficult position because other than Halliburton, our top 6-7 guys are just average players who are inconsistent. I think the best Prohm can do is to start the hot hand from game to game. I would start Young & Lewis over Jacobson & Nixon.
Young’s been playing better but he’s always been focused on boxing out. He hasn’t always been great at getting rebounds but he’s always put effort in getting an opponents rebounder out of the play.
 

CyArob

Why are you the way that you are?
Apr 22, 2011
32,464
13,369
113
MN
I'm pretty sure the Monstars stole Jacobson's talent from last year.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: isu83

isucy86

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2006
7,748
6,291
113
Dubuque
Young’s been playing better but he’s always been focused on boxing out. He hasn’t always been great at getting rebounds but he’s always put effort in getting an opponents rebounder out of the play.

That's a bit like saying a guy who hits 25% of his shots is a good shooter because his shooting form is good.

Solo is an effort guy- but when we play small our post guy needs rebounding production.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: sheepplucker