JBo deserves another thread

PCHawk said:
Correct not everyone who gets a good job is good at what he does. Good thing we already have results for Fran (and the Prez) and while neither are doing a great all around job, they're doing way too good at the level they are at to consider bad.
Click to expand...

14 and 24 over 2 years is not very good. Maybe a decent batting average.
 
HawkGold said:
Cant argue except when you shoot low you stand a good chance of being blocked. dpped and good D likely acct for more of the confidence issued.

Cant believe he never told his son to quit shooting like a girl.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure guys who shoot low understand how much space they need to get a shot off. If you knew what you were talking about you would have said when you shoot low it's harder to get enough space to get your shot off. Didn't your assistant coach teach you anything while using you as a stepping stone? Learn the game please.
 
HawkGold said:
Cant believe he never told his son to quit shooting like a girl.
Click to expand...

I don't know if the stats still hold up but when I was growing up girls shooting percentage was superior to boys on every level of basketball. So maybe Fran just isn't a sexist and maybe he believes a girls shot is just as good as a boys shot.
 
Adam said:
I don't know if the stats still hold up but when I was growing up girls shooting percentage was superior to boys on every level of basketball. So maybe Fran just isn't a sexist and maybe he believes a girls shot is just as good as a boys shot.
Click to expand...

Men have advantages physically in most ways, but shooting an open shot successfully isn't really one of them. Of course their percentage is higher because they shoot a smaller ball.
 
PCHawk said:
Men have advantages physically in most ways, but shooting an open shot successfully isn't really one of them. Of course their percentage is higher because they shoot a smaller ball.
Click to expand...

Well that's kind of a in a vacuum distinction. The average female hand is smaller than the average male hand. I believe the ball is scaled accordingly to this difference. So logically they are doing the exact same thing proportionally to size. I guess the inch circumference difference probably adds just a little advantage seeing it go through the hoop.

All the same lots of girls have dead eye shots. There is nothing wrong with a girls shot. I think a higher start point actually starts to feel more natural as both boys and girls mature to adulthood.
 
Adam said:
Well that's kind of a in a vacuum distinction. The average female hand is smaller than the average male hand. I believe the ball is scaled accordingly to this difference. So logically they are doing the exact same thing proportionally to size. I guess the inch circumference difference probably adds just a little advantage seeing it go through the hoop.

All the same lots of girls have dead eye shots. There is nothing wrong with a girls shot. I think a higher start point actually starts to feel more natural as both boys and girls mature to adulthood.
Click to expand...

Most adult females still dont shoot high. Prportional or not w the hand the hoop is still the same size and the ball was smaller.

A lower shot is still easier to defend. Especially for higher jumping and reaching defenders.
 
Adam said:
I don't know if the stats still hold up but when I was growing up girls shooting percentage was superior to boys on every level of basketball. So maybe Fran just isn't a sexist and maybe he believes a girls shot is just as good as a boys shot.
Click to expand...

You want to go back to the 40s and 50s?
 
Adam said:
I don't know if the stats still hold up but when I was growing up girls shooting percentage was superior to boys on every level of basketball. So maybe Fran just isn't a sexist and maybe he believes a girls shot is just as good as a boys shot.
Click to expand...

There is a lot of mustard in that post.
 
Adam said:
Well that's kind of a in a vacuum distinction. The average female hand is smaller than the average male hand. I believe the ball is scaled accordingly to this difference. So logically they are doing the exact same thing proportionally to size. I guess the inch circumference difference probably adds just a little advantage seeing it go through the hoop.

All the same lots of girls have dead eye shots. There is nothing wrong with a girls shot. I think a higher start point actually starts to feel more natural as both boys and girls mature to adulthood.
Click to expand...
Shooting at a bigger rim compared to the ball is a pretty big advantage. A mens ball that rattles out is a swoosh with a woman's. A mens ball that bricks rattles in with a women's.
 
HawkGold said:
Most adult females still dont shoot high. Prportional or not w the hand the hoop is still the same size and the ball was smaller.

A lower shot is still easier to defend. Especially for higher jumping and reaching defenders.
Click to expand...

Again the difference is 1". That is like saying pool is easier if the pocket is 1 centimeter wider. Of course this has factual basis, but on such a miniature scale that it plays no practical bearing.

Woman basketball players are also largely shorter than their positional counterparts. They didn't lower the hoop. So I would actually summarize that the height difference outweighs the 1" ball reduction. At worst it negates the latter. Therefore rendering woman as statistically better shooters then men.
 
BryceC said:
I prefer to blame the multi-millionaires who coach these teams versus the 18-22 year olds, who were assembled and coached by said multi-millionaire. Very little that happens at any point is directly influenced by who the coach is.
Click to expand...

You go on ahead with your blame train. I said the players need to "own" the defensive deficiencies. I can see how one could interrupt it the way you did, but the use of the word own was not for a lack of a better word. It was deliberate because I have stated my overall opinion about the defense many times. I believe it is a buy in issue.

Owning your part of any failure is what buying in looks like in the sporting world. Ask not what your team can do for you, but what you can do for your team kind of stuff. I don't believe that we have had that buy in for the last 3 seasons.

It's not blame it's an emotionless opinion.
 
If there is someone to blame for a teams shortcomings it would definitely be the multi-millionaires that coach the team. They recruit and coach the guys. It is to bad we weren't able to see the true Bohannon the last couple of years because of injuries.
 
Adam said:
Again the difference is 1". That is like saying pool is easier if the pocket is 1 centimeter wider. Of course this has factual basis, but on such a miniature scale that it plays no practical bearing.

Woman basketball players are also largely shorter than their positional counterparts. They didn't lower the hoop. So I would actually summarize that the height difference outweighs the 1" ball reduction. At worst it negates the latter. Therefore rendering woman as statistically better shooters then men.
Click to expand...

It's actually easier for a shorter person to shoot a ball up to the basket softly than it is a tall person. If a 7' guy and a 6' guy shoot a ball with the exact same arch, the taller guy's ball would be coming down slightly faster, and therefore harder, than the shorter guy. 2 reasons girls have better percentages. One is the smaller ball and 2 is slower recovery after a pass leading to more open shots. Girls are better than guys at some things, but sports (or anything physical or athletic) is not one of them.

As far as your pool analogy goes, if the pockets were slightly bigger I would make a decently higher percentage of shots. It wouldn't take a much bigger pocket at all to increase my makes by 10%

Are you really arguing that women are actually more talented at shooting a basketball than men? Or are you just trying to say they are equal?
 
Adam said:
Again the difference is 1". That is like saying pool is easier if the pocket is 1 centimeter wider. Of course this has factual basis, but on such a miniature scale that it plays no practical bearing.

Woman basketball players are also largely shorter than their positional counterparts. They didn't lower the hoop. So I would actually summarize that the height difference outweighs the 1" ball reduction. At worst it negates the latter. Therefore rendering woman as statistically better shooters then men.
Click to expand...

I ve coached at hs level. No. Would agree that below average boys and girls... maybe to the gitls because of method. But I m talking Class A level where some kids dont belong but can make the team. College level... no way

Btw Iowa men shot 74 percent ft. Women 77. I would guess some had to do with 2nd place vs 10 and 10.

Ever played Russian billiard?
 
Last edited:
PCHawk said:
It's actually easier for a shorter person to shoot a ball up to the basket softly than it is a tall person. If a 7' guy and a 6' guy shoot a ball with the exact same arch, the taller guy's ball would be coming down slightly faster, and therefore harder, than the shorter guy. 2 reasons girls have better percentages. One is the smaller ball and 2 is slower recovery after a pass leading to more open shots. Girls are better than guys at some things, but sports (or anything physical or athletic) is not one of them.

As far as your pool analogy goes, if the pockets were slightly bigger I would make a decently higher percentage of shots. It wouldn't take a much bigger pocket at all to increase my makes by 10%

Are you really arguing that women are actually more talented at shooting a basketball than men? Or are you just trying to say they are equal?
Click to expand...

Well I don't know how it is for a 7 footer to shoot, but I can attest that shooting the ball from my 6'4 frame is sure as hell easier then my early HS years standing at 5'11.

To answer your last question. I'm not really making the argument that girls are more "talented" shooters. I'm just playing devil's advocate to the idea that a father should ridicule his boys for shooting like a girl when in reality the end results are negligible.
 
HawkGold said:
I ve coached at hs level. No. Would agree that below average boys and girls... maybe to the gitls because of method. But I m talking Class A level where some kids dont belong but can make the team. College level... no way

Btw Iowa men shot 74 percent ft. Women 77. I would guess some had to do with 2nd place vs 10 and 10.

Ever played Russian billiard?
Click to expand...

I don't even know what Russian billiard is. I thought about googling it, but then remembered that as a conservative searching anything Russian is likely to end me up on federal watchlists. I'm sure I'm on enough already based on political contributions so I will just let you explain it if you feel necessary.
 
Adam said:
Well I don't know how it is for a 7 footer to shoot, but I can attest that shooting the ball from my 6'4 frame is sure as hell easier then my early HS years standing at 5'11.

To answer your last question. I'm not really making the argument that girls are more "talented" shooters. I'm just playing devil's advocate to the idea that a father should ridicule his boys for shooting like a girl when in reality the end results are negligible.
Click to expand...

Well I'm going to stop arguing with you since you are clearly right since you are arguing with Gold.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top