Josh 3 point Oh...

[tm3308]

Well it doesnt matter unless you can tell me how much of every players stats actually had impact.

Also let me know the next time you hear somebody say "He has five grand slams but only 2 of them really should count because the score was close at the time"

You might not hear that, exactly. But if a guy hits five dingers in one game against bad pitching, and then does little against good pitching, you'll probably hear people wonder if he can really get it done when it counts.

I've been rooting for JO for 2+years, just hoping he could get over whatever mental block he had. I never doubted that the kid could shoot; he hit probably 85% of his threes in warmups all year last year and I'm sure he looked just as good in practice (otherwise, why would Fran have kept such confidence in him?). It was never a question of physical ability. The guy just didn't look comfortable taking meaningful shots.

 

[deanvogs]

You might not hear that, exactly. But if a guy hits five dingers in one game against bad pitching, and then does little against good pitching, you'll probably hear people wonder if he can really get it done when it counts.

I've been rooting for JO for 2+years, just hoping he could get over whatever mental block he had. I never doubted that the kid could shoot; he hit probably 85% of his threes in warmups all year last year and I'm sure he looked just as good in practice (otherwise, why would Fran have kept such confidence in him?). It was never a question of physical ability. The guy just didn't look comfortable taking meaningful shots.

Keep digging that hole Tork. This ain't baseball. I have never, ever, once in my life heard this line of argument, where you take away made baskets because they are meaningless???

I'd like to see some updated stats on Chris Kingsbury. What was his actual shooting % Tork? Please remove all shots taken and made when Iowa either had the game in hand, or was so far down, that the shot was "meaningless".

K THX

 

[tm3308]

Keep digging that hole Tork. This ain't baseball. I have never, ever, once in my life heard this line of argument, where you take away made baskets because they are meaningless???

I'd like to see some updated stats on Chris Kingsbury. What was his actual shooting % Tork? Please remove all shots taken and made when Iowa either had the game in hand, or was so far down, that the shot was "meaningless".

K THX

I really don't understand what the big deal is about admitting that JO didn't look comfortable taking shots when we needed them during his first two seasons.

 

[deanvogs]

I really don't understand what the big deal is about admitting that JO didn't look comfortable taking shots when we needed them during his first two seasons.

I really don't understand what the big deal is to admit that he shot 37% his FR year. It is what he shot, but you are insisting on taking his made buckets away to make it seem that he didn't shoot what he did???

I simply don't recall Josh shooting scared his Fr. year, he looked fine, he shot better than I expect most Fr to shoot. Nobody is arguing with you about Josh 2.0, he had a terrible year last year shooting the ball.

I wish all incoming Fr. at Iowa would shot 37% from 3 pt. range. I mean go figure that an Fr. isn't Mr. clutch knocking down killer nail in the coffin type shots night after night......That is a HUGE shock, lets throw the baby out with the bathwater, and call him out on it.

 

[ICHAWK]

I really don't understand what the big deal is about admitting that JO didn't look comfortable taking shots when we needed them during his first two seasons.

Freshman year 37%
Sophomore year 27%
Junior year 60% (obviously will drop)

As a stat guy I believe in sample size not clutch. You first need a sample size good enough to determine a good baseline.

I hope that as an aspiring writer you will rise above writers who refuse to use logic and create narratives. You know guys who try to say a mlb player with a woba of .387 over thousands of plate appearances is not clutch because in 10 playoff plate appearances he has a .195 woba. He just doesnt have a big enough sample yet.

Josh will probably slump again not due to confidence. He is not a 60% 3 point shooter.

 

[tm3308]

I really don't understand what the big deal is to admit that he shot 37% his FR year. It is what he shot, but you are insisting on taking his made buckets away to make it seem that he didn't shoot what he did???

I simply don't recall Josh shooting scared his Fr. year, he looked fine, he shot better than I expect most Fr to shoot. Nobody is arguing with you about Josh 2.0, he had a terrible year last year shooting the ball.

I wish all incoming Fr. at Iowa would shot 37% from 3 pt. range. I mean go figure that an Fr. isn't Mr. clutch knocking down killer nail in the coffin type shots night after night......That is a HUGE shock, lets throw the baby out with the bathwater, and call him out on it.

I didn't say it was shocking for a freshman to not be the guy to nail daggers. But he didn't look particularly comfortable when he got those opportunities, and he was just in an all-round funk last year. We've all seen what he can do when he DOES relax (we saw that from him as a freshman; he just didn't look relaxed all the time). Now he looks more relaxed when he gets the chance to hit a dagger shot (in fact, he shows no hesitation at all, and showing what Fran saw in him all along.

My original intent was that it's not like Oglesby has never been relaxed on the court. It's just that now he looks relaxed all the time, which didn't always appear to be the case for him.

 

[deanvogs]

Freshman year 37%
Sophomore year 27%
Junior year 60% (obviously will drop)

As a stat guy I believe in sample size not clutch. You first need a sample size good enough to determine a good baseline.

I hope that as an aspiring writer you will rise above writers who refuse to use logic and create narratives. You know guys who try to say a mlb player with a woba of .387 over thousands of plate appearances is not clutch because in 10 playoff plate appearances he has a .195 woba. He just doesnt have a big enough sample yet.

Josh will probably slump again not due to confidence. He is not a 60% 3 point shooter.

I think this is what bothers me about what Tork is asserting. He is using his OPINION, and then manipulating the data to support his opinion. Taking out Josh's best statistical games, to make your opinion look more like fact is a slippery slope. First of all taking any statistics out of any game is silly, let along from games that we are playing against 2 of the 5 best teams we faced all year. If anything playing against the best competition, and the best defenders shows what a player can do, even if the TEAM (not Ogs, he is only one player) got blown out that game.

Maybe it strikes a nerve with me as well, as this is all we see from "journalist" these days. They create a narrative, then manipulate the date (take things out or put them in, they don't use the actual raw data) to support the narrative. They make themselves and their opinion the story, not the actual subject matter or data. FYI Tork, I realize you are post on a message board, and this isn't an article of yours......

 

[ssckelley]

It is easy to look relaxed on the court when you have your shot going down. There was not a moment Oglesby came out on the court last year and I thought he looked tense, maybe after he missed a shot or 2. But I do remember a couple of WTF moments when I seen Oglesby bending the rims on his patented fade away 3 point attempts.

 

[22hawkeyes]

I think this is what bothers me about what Tork is asserting. He is using his OPINION, and then manipulating the data to support his opinion. Taking out Josh's best statistical games, to make your opinion look more like fact is a slippery slope. First of all taking any statistics out of any game is silly, let along from games that we are playing against 2 of the 5 best teams we faced all year. If anything playing against the best competition, and the best defenders shows what a player can do, even if the TEAM (not Ogs, he is only one player) got blown out that game.

Maybe it strikes a nerve with me as well, as this is all we see from "journalist" these days. They create a narrative, then manipulate the date (take things out or put them in, they don't use the actual raw data) to support the narrative. They make themselves and their opinion the story, not the actual subject matter or data. FYI Tork, I realize you are post on a message board, and this isn't an article of yours......

This

 

[OUTofTOWNHAWK]

You might not hear that, exactly. But if a guy hits five dingers in one game against bad pitching, and then does little against good pitching, you'll probably hear people wonder if he can really get it done when it counts.

I've been rooting for JO for 2+years, just hoping he could get over whatever mental block he had. I never doubted that the kid could shoot; he hit probably 85% of his threes in warmups all year last year and I'm sure he looked just as good in practice (otherwise, why would Fran have kept such confidence in him?). It was never a question of physical ability. The guy just didn't look comfortable taking meaningful shots.

Im not saying your not rooting for him.

Im just saying (sticking with baseball) nobody will ever say Ohh Cabrera hit 45 hrs but only 30 or them matter. They might say he is clutch.

Thing is we dont watch every player and we cant see every shot. Stats are just what they are, they are made against good teams and bad teams they are made in close games and game that are decided. Baseball should show you that you could make a stat for any situation but nobody really cares who hits the most doubles on saturdays and tuesdays in the month of July with runners on 1st and 3rd on the road in citys that start with C.


Is there a difference between the beginning of a game against a crappy team(close score) or the end of a game against good talent like Indiana(game decided)?