Maybe that yeah shouldn't have. It was over generalized to the detriment of the game
Crazy at St John's
- Thread starter RU72
- Start date
There is a coach on the Pitino skill level who said that there are only 2 shots in basketball. A layup and a 3-pointer. His name is Pete Carril.
Well, if you shoot 50% from 2 and 33 1/3% from 3, you score the same number of points per possession. So at 35% from long range, you score more by bombing away. Most teams cannot muster the 50% mark from 2 consistently, either. It's just math.
Exactly. If you look back, it's amazing how long it took basketball in general to figure this out.
A lot of people still don't get it.
Once you see it, it seems like the most elementary, obvious thing.
Now go play pickup with 1's and 2's and try explaining it to guys who don't get it. Ughhh!
I think Carril is even higher on the skill level. And he too, is wrong on this point.
The value of a shot is a function of how easy the shot is for you, multiplied by how much and in which direction you are affected by the context in which you take it (in flow, under duress, clutch), multiplied by the value of the shot.
A shot that you are good at and feels good in flow should be taken.
The challenge comes when your lineup doesn't have shooters who mostly can hit threes at 33% or better, and the defense takes away the paint. What then? The offense gets stagnant trying to probe for openings for layups and ends up kicking out to poor shooters late in the clock?
The midrange game shouldn't be your primary method of scoring as an offense - you should be working primarily to get layups and threes (for those who can hit them at a consistent clip). But players need the ability to adapting to where the weak points are in a defense. Hitting a few midrange jumpers forces the defense to respect that shot - which can open up the paint for layups again.
The midrange game shouldn't be your primary method of scoring as an offense - you should be working primarily to get layups and threes (for those who can hit them at a consistent clip). But players need the ability to adapting to where the weak points are in a defense. Hitting a few midrange jumpers forces the defense to respect that shot - which can open up the paint for layups again.
Really. It is mathematically and conceptually correct.
May not be how you think about it and that's fine. But if you were building a model, it's where you would start.
or do you think it's silly to suggest Carril>Pitino
It’s 4-5th grade level coaching
There is a line on the court and shots behind it are worth more- that matters
You have teammates who/where they are and their abilities matter
There is a shot clock- it matters
There is a game score and game clock those matter too
Pitino said at his introduction presser that he was going to clear the roster. So the only thing surprising is that half the team hasn't hit the portal yet.
St. John's made a deal with the devil. These kind of things usually do not end well.
I remember an NFL game years back where one of the wide outs was named Fair Hooker.
And one of the TV announcers for the game....Don Meredith...made the claim that there was no such thing as a fair hooker.
It's the Kansas State blueprint, as Tang only started with 2 returning players in his first year of coaching KSU last year. Can't stand Pitino and hope he falls flat on his face, although I'm sure he'll do well, as he is a good coach even if he is a scumbag.
https://www.kansas.com/sports/college/big-12/kansas-state/article273189510.html
I think Pitino will do well, but not great with St. Johns. He is a good/very good court coach with a big name who at least initially will bring in talent.
However his biggest "skill" has been getting exceptional talent through under the table means. I do not like a lot about the NIL, but I will say that at least most of the money being "above the table" really negates the recruiting advantages guys like Pitino has enjoyed.
I do not think he will be a flop, but would really be surprised to see St. Johns, rise to a powerhouse as well.
However his biggest "skill" has been getting exceptional talent through under the table means. I do not like a lot about the NIL, but I will say that at least most of the money being "above the table" really negates the recruiting advantages guys like Pitino has enjoyed.
I do not think he will be a flop, but would really be surprised to see St. Johns, rise to a powerhouse as well.
Last edited:
We gotta up the game. I've heard there are a few "hookers and blow" experts on this board. We need to make them part of the staff (only kidding of course).
I’m
A big advantage before was under the table money and perks, which players can now get elsewhere out in the open
So I dont think he will have a further advantage beyond his name as a good coach and the actual coaching
Name and coaching should and will make st johns better, how much? Some of it might be blunted by the evening up of player benefits
An interesting point
A big advantage before was under the table money and perks, which players can now get elsewhere out in the open
So I dont think he will have a further advantage beyond his name as a good coach and the actual coaching
Name and coaching should and will make st johns better, how much? Some of it might be blunted by the evening up of player benefits
Would Rutgers be better next year if we only returned Cliff Mag and Spencer and decided in the beginning of the offseason the next 5 guys to play came from the portal? It’s an interesting question. Certain programs it’s probably an easy question.
