ISU News and Tweets

I know that Fred hated the mid-range shot, but if you shoot 32% from 3-pt line (and are 268th in the nation), the mid-range is probably a better option.
I think that’s the big misuse in analytics in any sport. The analytics more instruct you how to build a roster and an offensive system than drive shot selection. If the best roster you can put together is best in the mid-range, then it can be a good option. Additionally you are seeing defensive and personnel and schemes follow suit - overplay on the perimeter and have a rim protector ready to help. So you are starting to see the mid-range come back a bit because it is a shot you can usually get good looks off of. A quick look at Gabe’s stats and it’s a no-brainer. His FG % from 2 is way higher than his effective FG% from 3. Considering he does not attack the rim a ton, it’s safe to say a mid-range, or more generally 2 pt attempt not at the rim is a better look for him than a 3.
 
Only if you exceed 48% from the midrange and if rebounding the miss remains the same.

Missed threes often lead to rebounds further from the hoop which are slightly easier for the offense to get if they can pin the defender in closer.

That said, I like our midrange game. Last couple of games it has probably exceeded are within five feet game
A good mix is probably the best option. If a player mixes up midrange, 3 attempts and taking it to the hole it forces defenders to play honest and you get better looks from all three.
 
I think that’s the big misuse in analytics in any sport. The analytics more instruct you how to build a roster and an offensive system than drive shot selection. If the best roster you can put together is best in the mid-range, then it can be a good option. Additionally you are seeing defensive and personnel and schemes follow suit - overplay on the perimeter and have a rim protector ready to help. So you are starting to see the mid-range come back a bit because it is a shot you can usually get good looks off of. A quick look at Gabe’s stats and it’s a no-brainer. His FG % from 2 is way higher than his effective FG% from 3. Considering he does not attack the rim a ton, it’s safe to say a mid-range, or more generally 2 pt attempt not at the rim is a better look for him than a 3.

I'd imagine the 3 point line getting extended out a few years ago plays a role as well. That much less space to work with on the corner 3s, that much more space opened up in the midrange.
 
Nah it wasn't showing anyone up. It was made at himself/teammates.
In the past it used to be if you slammed the ball down and didn't catch it on the rebound it was a T no questions asked. I have seen it multiple times this year with it never being called. Was there a directive given out this year or last to not call this a T?
 
  • Like
Reactions: davegilbertson
In the past it used to be if you slammed the ball down and didn't catch it on the rebound it was a T no questions asked. I have seen it multiple times this year with it never being called. Was there a directive given out this year or last to not call this a T?
I don't know the official answer, in theory I believe it's supposed to be a T. However, I would rather it not be, especially in that situation. He wasn't delaying the game or anything, either.
 
I don't know the official answer, in theory I believe it's supposed to be a T. However, I would rather it not be, especially in that situation. He wasn't delaying the game or anything, either.
Only reason it wasn't a T was because the clock was at zero and people were already jogging off to the locker room. Had the ball been live or there was time on the clock, Johnny probably gets a T.
 
Only reason it wasn't a T was because the clock was at zero and people were already jogging off to the locker room. Had the ball been live or there was time on the clock, Johnny probably gets a T.
I'm not so sure. Every other year I can remember it has been an automatic T. This year I have seen it about a half a dozen times in a variety of situations and I have not seen it T'd up a single time.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Statefan10
I like it when pro sports reseeds between rounds.

I like how the NFL does it and wish the NBA/MLB would.

I'm glad the NCAA tournament does not, though.

Assuming the regional groupings remained the same, then this weekend would be...

#1 Kansas
#11 Iowa State
~~~
#4 Providence
#10 The U

Glad we dodged the Beakers until the Elite Eight if making it that far.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: CascadeClone
I had this sense, but hadn't tracked down the numbers - we really do win or lose entirely depending on whether we make more 3s than the other team.

We are 20-2 when making more 3-pt shots than our opponents (losses @OU and @TTU)
We are 2-10 when making the same or fewer 3-pt shots (wins Alabama St and Memphis)

I looked at Miami, and that trend does NOT apply:
Miami is 10-5 when making more 3-pt shots than their opponents
But is 15-5 when making the same or fewer 3-pt shots

Would probably look similar to most decent P5 teams. The 3 point shot is the most dangerous offensive weapon in the game and I think that’s why you’ve seen us selling out to stop 3 point shots even if that means giving up an easier look from 2.
 
I'm not so sure. Every other year I can remember it has been an automatic T. This year I have seen it about a half a dozen times in a variety of situations and I have not seen it T'd up a single time.
Maybe not then I guess I haven't seen guys do it this year often. I always thought that you can slam it as hard as you want but when it goes above you it's supposed to be an automatic T. Maybe they laid off the rule though?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: VeloClone
Edey did it against Texas after getting fouled. No T given.
 
Read the play by play for when a foul and a turnover occurred the same time. Here are our offensive fouls
1st half
15:39 brockington drawn by Davison
13:40 Robert jones drawn by Hepburn
9:04 brockington drawn by Davison
0:44 conditt drawn by Davis
2nd half
15:09 conditt drawn by Davison
The two offensive fouls on Brockington should not have been called on him in the first half. Davison should have been called for a flop warning at 15:39.

At 9:04 of the first half, Davison was sticking his but into Brockington as IB was cutting through the lane and was not allowing him to cut to the baseline. As soon as IB pushed off to get some room, offensive foul.

And then 15:09 second half Davison jumped into George when he had plenty of room to go over the top and get to the ISU shooter. Davison was totally beat and took a cheap shot at George to get a foul call and the refs bought it. Davison even stepped on George's ankle. Terrible officiating on those plays.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: jcyclonee

Help Support Us

Become a patron