Gatens is shooting 29% from 3 since traveling to The Barn

[DuffMan]

The odds of an offensive rebounds is > on a missed 2 ptr than a missed 3 ptr though. With the shooting troubles, this is how Iowa was able to score early on in the year, they crashed the O boards.

I get what you are saying and agree with where you are going with it in regards to eFG%.

I don't know about that. When I played in HS I loved to offensive rebounds off of missed long jump shots. They typically result in more long rebounds and I felt my chances were greater of getting a board in that situation than when someone misses a 10 footer and the ball stays near the rim.

I'm not saying that makes me right, that's just always been my perception. I wonder if anyone has ever really analyzed that.

I scored 10 points a game in HS off nothing but offensive rebounds and garbage. I also lead the Charlestown Chiefs in penalty minutes.

 

[EddyP]

In all honesty that isn't necessarily the case. It really depends on what your team overall shoots from the floor. If you factor out all of Iowa's 3 point shots they are as a team shooting about 49% from the floor. Shooting 33% from behind the arc calculates to an effective FG% of 49%.

Obviously I'd take a higher percentage but 33% is right around the break even mark.

The real problem isn't that Matt is shooting 33% from behind the arc, it's that he's our leading 3 point shooter and he's only shooting a mediocre percentage.

Yes. When he is the best you have at shooting the three that percentage needs to be better if you are going to have a chance at beating some teams. 33% is what you should expect from guys that are even attempting 3's(Cartwright, May, maybe Marble), but when this is what you do and you are suppose to be the best at it fans are going to expect more and rightly so. That is why he is a "lightning rod" right now. He knows he can do better and I expect he will.

 

[tm3308]

I don't know about that. When I played in HS I loved to offensive rebounds off of missed long jump shots. They typically result in more long rebounds and I felt my chances were greater of getting a board in that situation than when someone misses a 10 footer and the ball stays near the rim.

I'm not saying that makes me right, that's just always been my perception. I wonder if anyone has ever really analyzed that.


I scored 10 points a game in HS off nothing but offensive rebounds and garbage. I also lead the Charlestown Chiefs in penalty minutes.

If our perimeter players stuck around to rebound more, I'd agree with you. But our guys tend to head down the floor to get back on defense, which makes it more likely that long rebounds won't go our way.

They are worth 3 points when there is 15 minutes left in the first half and they are worth 3 points when there is 45 seconds left in the game.

They're worth the same, sure. But the pressure involved is totally different. Same way that a baseball player might hit .350 on the season, but only .220 with runners in scoring position, or in crunch time of a close game.

It's just like Ricky Stanzi, and the debate that raged about which one we wanted: 2010 Ricky, and his great efficiency and statistics but for whatever reason couldn't deliver in the clutch. Or 2009 Ricky, who made you pull your hair out all game until the 4th quarter, when he'd pull out the magic.

You miss a 3 early, you've got all kinds of time to overcome that miss, which is why there is much less pressure. You miss it late when the team really needs it, and you may have just missed your chance. That's what seems to happen a lot around here.

 

[DuffMan]

If our perimeter players stuck around to rebound more, I'd agree with you. But our guys tend to head down the floor to get back on defense, which makes it more likely that long rebounds won't go our way.




They're worth the same, sure. But the pressure involved is totally different. Same way that a baseball player might hit .350 on the season, but only .220 with runners in scoring position, or in crunch time of a close game.

It's just like Ricky Stanzi, and the debate that raged about which one we wanted: 2010 Ricky, and his great efficiency and statistics but for whatever reason couldn't deliver in the clutch. Or 2009 Ricky, who made you pull your hair out all game until the 4th quarter, when he'd pull out the magic.

You miss a 3 early, you've got all kinds of time to overcome that miss, which is why there is much less pressure. You miss it late when the team really needs it, and you may have just missed your chance. That's what seems to happen a lot around here.

The reality is they are both the same guy. There is no way Ricky could be expected to come from behind in nearly every game in 2009, and there is no way Ricky should fail to deliver at all in 2010. When you look at everything as a whole you realize he was a very very good QB that got it done about half the time in the crunch. That's pretty good.

 

[woodyk1]

If our perimeter players stuck around to rebound more, I'd agree with you. But our guys tend to head down the floor to get back on defense, which makes it more likely that long rebounds won't go our way.




They're worth the same, sure. But the pressure involved is totally different. Same way that a baseball player might hit .350 on the season, but only .220 with runners in scoring position, or in crunch time of a close game.

It's just like Ricky Stanzi, and the debate that raged about which one we wanted: 2010 Ricky, and his great efficiency and statistics but for whatever reason couldn't deliver in the clutch. Or 2009 Ricky, who made you pull your hair out all game until the 4th quarter, when he'd pull out the magic.

You miss a 3 early, you've got all kinds of time to overcome that miss, which is why there is much less pressure. You miss it late when the team really needs it, and you may have just missed your chance. That's what seems to happen a lot around here.

And, when you miss it late, you may be the only player willing to take the shot. I am not necessarily saying that is the case with Gatens (Cartwright will take late shots and has made some and missed some as well), but I believe you have to take that into account as well.

In baseball, it's the next guy in the lineup. In football, it's the QB. In basketball, there are choices.

 

[tm3308]

And, when you miss it late, you may be the only player willing to take the shot. I am not necessarily saying that is the case with Gatens (Cartwright will take late shots and has made some and missed some as well), but I believe you have to take that into account as well.

In baseball, it's the next guy in the lineup. In football, it's the QB. In basketball, there are choices.

Then again, Gatens also knows that he's our only real option for a clutch 3. There's a difference between taking a shot because you want it, and taking it because you have to. I'm not saying that Gatens doesn't want it, because I don't know. Just saying that taking the shot doesn't necessarily indicate that he wants it.

 

[tm3308]

The reality is they are both the same guy. There is no way Ricky could be expected to come from behind in nearly every game in 2009, and there is no way Ricky should fail to deliver at all in 2010. When you look at everything as a whole you realize he was a very very good QB that got it done about half the time in the crunch. That's pretty good.

I agree. But so far, we've only gotten failed attempts to deliver from Gatens. And he's not putting up crazy good numbers throughout the rest of the game like Stanzi did this year.

 

[woodyk1]

Then again, Gatens also knows that he's our only real option for a clutch 3. There's a difference between taking a shot because you want it, and taking it because you have to. I'm not saying that Gatens doesn't want it, because I don't know. Just saying that taking the shot doesn't necessarily indicate that he wants it.

Fair enough. Cartwright has been an option (not necessarily for a 3) late in games as well. I think the coach knows who is willing (and wants) to take the shot.

 

[JHHawk]

He shot 32.8 last year, and he is shooting 32.9 this year. Semantics.

Shooting 32% or 33% from the 3 pt line is bad in college basketball. You need to be around the 40% for the volume Matt is shooting.

For the sake of fairness,why don't we look at Matts 3 point shooting with a cast on his left hand vs without the cast?

With the cast in the first 7 games- 6 for 35 from the arc...17%
Without the cast the next 22 games- 46 of 121...38%

I think it really affected his ability to shoot with that cast on his left hand,obviously. He has been slumping,I concede,but overall, his shooting from the arc without the cast,even tho his hand will not really heal til the offseason, is respectable. And the sample without the cast is the toughest part of the schedule as well.

 

[JHHawk]

Yes. When he is the best you have at shooting the three that percentage needs to be better if you are going to have a chance at beating some teams. 33% is what you should expect from guys that are even attempting 3's(Cartwright, May, maybe Marble), but when this is what you do and you are suppose to be the best at it fans are going to expect more and rightly so. That is why he is a "lightning rod" right now. He knows he can do better and I expect he will.

Ok,then why don't Bryce(26%) Devyn(28%) and Zach(28%) get critiqued for not hitting that 33% you say should be the standard for them?
At least they have been healthy all year,as opposed to Matt having a cast on his hand after surgery for his first 7 games in which he shot 17% from the arc. After that cast came off he has shot 38% from the arc.

 

[Section136]

You miss a 3 early, you've got all kinds of time to overcome that miss, which is why there is much less pressure. You miss it late when the team really needs it, and you may have just missed your chance. That's what seems to happen a lot around here.

You miss that 3 early and the one you shoot at the end of the game is not to tie or take the lead.

 

[tm3308]

You miss that 3 early and the one you shoot at the end of the game is not to tie or take the lead.

Sure, you can say that about any missed opportunity. That doesn't change the fact that the pressure gets amped up at the end of a close game. Some thrive on it, some don't.

 

[EddyP]

Ok,then why don't Bryce(26%) Devyn(28%) and Zach(28%) get critiqued for not hitting that 33% you say should be the standard for them?
At least they have been healthy all year,as opposed to Matt having a cast on his hand after surgery for his first 7 games in which he shot 17% from the arc. After that cast came off he has shot 38% from the arc.

I'm not saying they shouldn't be but Cartwright can do other things offensively to make up for that and with Marble and McCabe we are talking about true freshman. Cartwright and Marble aren't really 3 point shooters but if they are going to take them then yes that standard should apply. McCabe however is a 3 point shooter so he should definitely be hitting that mark even as a freshman especially this late in the season.