Is this the worst...
- Thread starter EsoxHawk
- Start date
Iowa is 4th in the BT in 3-pt% defense at 33.1%
Illinois is the best at 30.2%
PSU is the worst at 39.5%
UncleHawk
Uncle-Percentage defense is relative. Number of made 3 pt fg's is what I am interested in, if you use percentage defense, 5-9 against is worse then 10-30 against, but you lose against the opponent that goes 10-30 more often than against the team that goes 5-9 even though 5-9 is a worse % against.
1977Hawkeye
Well-Known Member
I'm no mathematical genius, but I'm not sure that's accurate. If you shoot 30 threes, your number of opportunities from inside the arc go down, and vice versa. If a team goes 5-9 from 3, they are taking alot more shots from 2 point range. So I guess it depends on their percentages from inside the arc. I can live with giving up 5-9 from 3 if our interior defense is tough, but if we're giving up alot of easy points in the paint, then we're probably in trouble regardless.
If it was as simple as shooting as many 3's as you can so that your "3's made per game" go up, then Lickliter's Iowa teams should have had more success. We made quite a few 3's every game, but we were still awful..
DuffMan
Well-Known Member
ForeverHawk
Well-Known Member
I would take my chances every game against a team that shot 10-30 from behind the arc! I think more times than not, you win those games.
Sirhouseman
Well-Known Member
I don't know about all time worst, but all time frustrating hell yes. I sincerely love watching Iowa basketball even when they're awful, but I was going ballistic on Sunday when UM got one open look after another. It was almost comical...but mostly disgusting. Iowa cut the lead to 9 late and UM had already made 14 three pointers. 14!!! Give up 14 uncontested layups instead and Iowa is winning! Just insane.
STILLBUSTER
Well-Known Member
Without searching any archives, I recall Iowa always having trouble defending the 3, going all the way back throughout the Davis era.
Not so sure it's "Iowa", or even "this team" but more the inherent by-product of playing so much zone defense. It tends to "force" the other team to take more outside shots.
As I said in another thread, it's not so much playing zone that's the problem, it's that "this team" is just not very good at executing zone defense. I've seen it asked, "Why stay in the zone when they are getting pummeled with the 3?" I see it as a coaching strategy to play the lesser of 2 evils -- although "this team" is not very good at zone defense, Fran sees that they simply don't have the depth (energy) or athleticism to primarily play man-2-man. (You think Cole and Brommer get in foul trouble now, it would be even worse going man. Not to mention that the guards / wings would repeatedly get beat off the dribble.)
Fran opts (hopes) to force the opponent to beat them from the outside. As someone said above, they'd gladly take an opponent shooting 30 - 3's and making 10 over one taking 10 and making 5. It's all about forcing the opponent to take a lower % shot.
The problem with "this team" is, because they execute zone defense so poorly (poor court awareness of cutters and ball movement; way too much over-helping and leaving their zone) the opponent gets too many clean looks from the outside. At this level, there isn't much difference to a shooter between an uncontested 15 footer or an uncontested 22 footer, except an additional point.
Right now, Iowa's "best" defense is hoping the other team has an off-shooting night. That's not as likely as long as they continue to get such open shots, regardless of whether the Hawks are in zone or man.
Not so sure it's "Iowa", or even "this team" but more the inherent by-product of playing so much zone defense. It tends to "force" the other team to take more outside shots.
As I said in another thread, it's not so much playing zone that's the problem, it's that "this team" is just not very good at executing zone defense. I've seen it asked, "Why stay in the zone when they are getting pummeled with the 3?" I see it as a coaching strategy to play the lesser of 2 evils -- although "this team" is not very good at zone defense, Fran sees that they simply don't have the depth (energy) or athleticism to primarily play man-2-man. (You think Cole and Brommer get in foul trouble now, it would be even worse going man. Not to mention that the guards / wings would repeatedly get beat off the dribble.)
Fran opts (hopes) to force the opponent to beat them from the outside. As someone said above, they'd gladly take an opponent shooting 30 - 3's and making 10 over one taking 10 and making 5. It's all about forcing the opponent to take a lower % shot.
The problem with "this team" is, because they execute zone defense so poorly (poor court awareness of cutters and ball movement; way too much over-helping and leaving their zone) the opponent gets too many clean looks from the outside. At this level, there isn't much difference to a shooter between an uncontested 15 footer or an uncontested 22 footer, except an additional point.
Right now, Iowa's "best" defense is hoping the other team has an off-shooting night. That's not as likely as long as they continue to get such open shots, regardless of whether the Hawks are in zone or man.
EddyP
Well-Known Member
You may have a point on the depth issue for playing a zone vs man in terms of getting into foul trouble but disagree that they don't have the energy and ability to do it. For one it take just as much energy or more to play a good zone defense. All the other team has to do is be patient and pass the ball around until they have an open shot. In the meantime guys are flying around all over the place trying to prevent the shot. My point is that I don't care if they are good at playing zone or not the other team will still find a way to beat it if they can hit the open shot. You may be right that Fran thinks this is our best shot, I just disagree that hoping the other team misses is our best shot. Like I said if we lose playing hard man to man the whole game then so be it.
hawkfaninTX
Well-Known Member
Oh i thought this was a thread about the worst server ever for a website..... my bad...... as you were.
HawksnWhiteSox
Well-Known Member
Over/Under 8.5 for the amount of career highs or school records a player/team sets against Iowa the rest of the year for an offensive category......
Hawks 3 pt FG % defense in Big Ten play=40%
BHGP analyzes every contest using EFG:
EFG%
Effective Field Goal Percentage; the formula is (FG + 0.5 * 3P) / FGA. This statistic adjusts for the fact that a 3-point field goal is worth one more point than a 2-point field goal. For example, suppose Player A goes 4 for 10 with 2 threes, while Player B goes 5 for 10 with 0 threes. Each player would have 10 points from field goals, and thus would have the same effective field goal percentage (50%).
Using this as a guide a team that scores 30 points from 3 on 10 for 30 shooting is far more dangerous than one that scores 30 on 15 2 point fg's because this would require 5 more scoring possessions.
I'd like to see the EFG against for this basketball team.
BHGP analyzes every contest using EFG:
EFG%
Effective Field Goal Percentage; the formula is (FG + 0.5 * 3P) / FGA. This statistic adjusts for the fact that a 3-point field goal is worth one more point than a 2-point field goal. For example, suppose Player A goes 4 for 10 with 2 threes, while Player B goes 5 for 10 with 0 threes. Each player would have 10 points from field goals, and thus would have the same effective field goal percentage (50%).
Using this as a guide a team that scores 30 points from 3 on 10 for 30 shooting is far more dangerous than one that scores 30 on 15 2 point fg's because this would require 5 more scoring possessions.
I'd like to see the EFG against for this basketball team.
they're 234th in the country, five behind PSU. They aren't even close to the worst Power 6 conference team. There are a few PAC 10 schools behind them with Oregon State bringing up the rear in 332nd place.
Iowa EFG 50.7
National average - 49
PSU - 50.5
Oregon - 50.7
Colorado - 50.5
Virginia - 51.3
UNI 50.2
ISU - 44.9
