No PT for Cougs?
- Thread starter masoncityhawkeye
- Start date
GhostofBTT
Banned
So what benefit would giving Cougill pt have? We would have done just as bad? Why try something different when you have a proven commodity?
FreddyBrown
Moderator
Cute, but misguided. Cougill has taken 45 three-pointers this season and many of those have been on plays designed or called for him to do so. Cole has taken five three-pointers this season and the fifth, taken last night, aptly demonstrated why they don't design plays for him to get that shot.
Cougill is a very good three-point shooter and he also happens to be 6'8 or better. He should have been on the court last night, particularly at the end of OT.
Again, it makes so much sense that he should have seen the court last night that I wonder if there was something else going on.
PodolakFan
Well-Known Member
Thank you. I sometimes wonder if these Coug lovers aren't from Souix City.
storminspank
Justin VanLaere
You don't think it would have been a good idea for our best three point shooter to be in when we were down three at the end of OT?
Spanky, if you bend over backward any farther to give Lick the benefit of the doubt, you're going to hurt yourself.
Not playing Cougill at all makes so little sense that I still wonder if there was some other issue that Coach didn't want to discuss that accounted for him sitting out.
I wouldn't classify Cougs as "our best three point shooter". And I am a big big fan of his.
Iowa wasn't looking to take a three anyway.
HawkIreign
Well-Known Member
Cougs game reminds me alot of David Palmer. I'm not at all suprised by this.
FreddyBrown
Moderator
Not so fast, my friend.
Coach Jordan said on his local radio i'view today that they were looking for a three but that they gave Matt the option to take it to the hoop if he saw an opening. Frankly, based on the way he said it it sounded like he was trying to cover for Matt. In any event, according to Jordan the three was option 1.By the way, if the guy with the highest shooting percentage on the team (apart from Cole, who thank God only takes them by default) isn't our best three point shooter, who is?
The only other remotely plausible candidate is Gatens, and Brennan is simply outshooting him. But the issue isn't whether Gatens or Cougill is better--it's why we didn't have both of them on the floor when we desperately needed a three.
GhostofBTT
Banned
Are we still following the fantasy that Cougill is still the best 3pt shooter on the team? Let me ask you this. When there are 13 seconds left in the game, how do you write up a play to get the ball in the hands of your biggest, slowest player, who is unable to create his own shot, 20 feet from the basket?
Iowa wasn't looking to take a three anyway.[/QUOTE]
It was questionable if there was enough time for a quick basket then try to foul game plan. If that were the case why did Iowa take so long to get the ball to the front court and pass the ball to Gatens (I was at the game and am trying to remember, but didn't Payne bring the ball up the court and hand it off/pass to Gatens?)....
Iowa is a 3 point shooting team, and they were down 3 points. Why would you not attempt to shoot the 3 point shot at this time?
It was questionable if there was enough time for a quick basket then try to foul game plan. If that were the case why did Iowa take so long to get the ball to the front court and pass the ball to Gatens (I was at the game and am trying to remember, but didn't Payne bring the ball up the court and hand it off/pass to Gatens?)....
Iowa is a 3 point shooting team, and they were down 3 points. Why would you not attempt to shoot the 3 point shot at this time?
1977Hawkeye
Well-Known Member
Cougill hasn't been creating his own shot all year long. It hasn't stopped him from shooting 40% from behind the arc, though.
By the way, that 40% is the highest percentage on the team, so I don't know why you would call that "fantasy". Cougill may not be the best pure shooter on the team, but it's pretty obvious that his outside shot isn't exactly a liability.
A lot of Cougill's looks come off the pick n pop. I don't know if there would have been enough time to run that. The other issue is that teams would be pressing the 3 point line and be willing to give Iowa a lay up so the pick n pop would not be effective.
He is a good shooter, but I would probably rather have wink in there.
tubahawk
Well-Known Member
Obviously Brommer is a much, much, more obvious choice to have on the floor than Cougill when you need a 3. Defenses would certainly feel the need to closely defend Brommer on the three point line because he is such a threat from that area.
Where as if Cougill were in the line up, there would have been no need for Michigan to waste a defender on him out on the perimeter and they could have let that defender cheat in and defend the lane or double team someone more capable of hitting the three.
FreddyBrown
Moderator
Casper, has it somehow escaped your attention that we really don't have anyone who can create his own shot from "3"? We either take them from so far out no one is defending, or do it by drive-and-jump pass or other pass out of the post, or by quick-passing around the perimeter, or off of a ball screen pass to the screener. That's how Cougill has gotten his shots before and could have gotten one last night.
storminspank
Justin VanLaere
There was 13 seconds or so when Iowa called the timeout, wasn't there?
Seems like plenty of time to get 1 and foul.
storminspank
Justin VanLaere
Gatens can. He did it last night. Several of his treys he had a guy in his face.
FreddyBrown
Moderator
You're talking about dealing with multiple contingencies instead of one: Make the two (we failed at step one), pray you get fouled, foul them with enough time left to get back down court and try another shot, avoid having the foul be deemed intentional, hope they miss one or both shots, and come down court again probably still needing a three to tie. The probability of hitting one three in the possession we had is higher.
And no, Gatens does not create threes. He either takes them from Coralville, comes off of a screen, or we manage to find him standing open. He does occasionally create a medium range jumper off of a drive, but it's usually not a great shot. Having a guy in his face doesn't mean he created anything. It means he took the shot even though he was covered. Thankfully he's pretty good at that. I just wish we'd have tried that option instead.
Last edited:
hawkeye12345
Well-Known Member
Freddy has it pretty much right on. With :15 to go there is plenty of time to run a set play but not enough time to run a set play, if it's a 2 foul, then run it up the court after their FTs and jack up a 3.
Why not take your time and run a set play and try and get an open look at a 3?
Why not take your time and run a set play and try and get an open look at a 3?
