Bear Down Wildcats

The honest truth though is, players don't progress very well offensively under Miller especially at developing their shot. It is just how he goes about coaching. He prefers freaky athletes over jump shooters which is fine to some extent but could cause problems against teams that equal or are near the Wildcats athleticism or play a good zone.

Has Miller ever had a great jump shooting team since he has been here? UCLA is a good team at defending the post which means you better hit your open looks which the Wildcats aren't really capable of. Look what happened against Oregon State. Huge chunks of last March (and that was with Nick Johnson on the team).

People looking at the last few games when they have scored 85+ or whatever but that was because they were dominating the inside and scoring off transition. Let's see how well that translates in March.

RockyRaccoon wrote:The honest truth though is, players don't progress very well offensively under Miller especially at developing their shot. It is just not how he goes about coaching. He prefers freaky athletes over jump shooters which is fine to some extent but could cause problems against teams that equal or are near the Wildcats athleticism or play a good zone.

Has Miller ever had a great jump shooting team since he has been here? UCLA is a good team at defending the post which means you better hit your open looks which the Wildcats aren't really capable of. Look what happened against Oregon State. Huge chunks of last March (and that was with Nick Johnson on the team).

People looking at the last few games when they have scored 85+ or whatever but that was because they were dominating the inside and scoring off transition. Let's see how well that translates in March.

The idea that players don't develop as shooters under multiple years of Miller is so completely wrong.

As for "average", even after last nights putrid shooting, Arizona is still one of the top Offensively Efficient teams in the country. They are currently #13 in the country, and have been inconsistently top-10 for most of the year. They are one of only three teams with a top-15 Offense and top-5 defense.

Yes, consistency is an issue, but it's not near the issue this thread makes it out to be.

JMarkJohns wrote:

RockyRaccoon wrote:The honest truth though is, players don't progress very well offensively under Miller especially at developing their shot. It is just not how he goes about coaching. He prefers freaky athletes over jump shooters which is fine to some extent but could cause problems against teams that equal or are near the Wildcats athleticism or play a good zone.

Has Miller ever had a great jump shooting team since he has been here? UCLA is a good team at defending the post which means you better hit your open looks which the Wildcats aren't really capable of. Look what happened against Oregon State. Huge chunks of last March (and that was with Nick Johnson on the team).

People looking at the last few games when they have scored 85+ or whatever but that was because they were dominating the inside and scoring off transition. Let's see how well that translates in March.

The idea that players don't develop as shooters under multiple years of Miller is so completely wrong.

As for "average", even after last nights putrid shooting, Arizona is still one of the top Offensively Efficient teams in the country. They are currently #13 in the country, and have been inconsistently top-10 for most of the year. They are one of only three teams with a top-15 Offense and top-5 defense.

Yes, consistency is an issue, but it's not near the issue this thread makes it out to be.

In the six seasons he has been here, I can name about four players: Nick Johnson, Solomon, Kyle Fogg, and Derrick Williams.

Guys like Hollis-Jefferson have been an absolute disaster at progressing offensively which is sad considering how good he is defensively.

Yes I know they have a high offensive efficiency but that has been earned by dominating the inside and athletically against Pac-12 competition. Like I said, we will see how that works in March when teams will make UCLA look like NAU.

You keep a knocking but you can't come in.

RHJ not progressing? He had like 22 points off his J last year and this year he has like 75. Dude is a sophomore. Read JMJ's comments and be enlightened. Will he ever be Salim or Kerr, no. But he has progressed.

TJ is a Better shooter this year. Probably just more confidence. York and Pitts are shooting it better. They have 9 managers who answer the call at anytime of the night to open McKale for extra shots. It's Not Miller so get off that train

azcat49 wrote:RHJ not progressing? He had like 22 points off his J last year and this year he has like 75. Dude is a sophomore. Read JMJ's comments and be enlightened. Will he ever be Salim or Kerr, no. But he has progressed.

TJ is a Better shooter this year. Probably just more confidence. York and Pitts are shooting it better. They have 9 managers who answer the call at anytime of the night to open McKale for extra shots. It's Not Miller so get off that train

Hollis-Jefferson is likely gone after this year. He can't shoot dude, don't kid yourself. Christ the guy has played competitive basketball his entire life, of course he can hit a wide open jumper every once in a while.

I just don't feel shooting is a priority to Miller.

Your points about Miller and defense first is very fair. I think it was Longhorned who in December said he thought Miller was working hard to emphasize offense as he was realizing he has to score to win the big, big games (think elite 8).

The premise that the players don't progress is preposterous though. You are right, RHJ will never be a great shooter but he will be like that kid at SDSU playing for the spurs as he progresses.

This is a better offensive team than last years and they almost all are shooting it better. A Lute team shooting like that last night would have got beat. Instead with Miller, we win those ugly games

azcat49 wrote:A Lute team shooting like that last night would have got beat. Instead with Miller, we win those ugly games

Don't think Lute would have left the starters in as long as Miller did to open up both halves.

I'm looking at you Mustafa.

azcat49 wrote:Your points about Miller and defense first is very fair. I think it was Longhorned who in December said he thought Miller was working hard to emphasize offense as he was realizing he has to score to win the big, big games (think elite 8).

The premise that the players don't progress is preposterous though. You are right, RHJ will never be a great shooter but he will be like that kid at SDSU playing for the spurs as he progresses.

This is a better offensive team than last years and they almost all are shooting it better. A Lute team shooting like that last night would have got beat. Instead with Miller, we win those ugly games

I'm sorry dude but to compare Kawahi Leonard and RHJ is crazy. I really do believe RHJ will be an NBA player for a long time but I imagine him being more of a Bruce Bowen rather than a Leonard. Leonard is seriously one of the best players in the league right now.

You're absolutely right about Miller being more willing to win the ugly games when compared to Lute but like I said unless he can consistently win that way in March, I have some reservations. Now people will read that and think, "Wow Rocky, you're really an idiot, you think we should fire Miller?" No I don't think we should fire Miller but having some criticisms of his coaching is not such a bad thing either.

I will buy the Bowen comparison but Leonard was a terrible shooter in college too. I think RHJ can get there. He has the work ethic and he is already an elite defender.

Miller has won already consistently in March. HisXavier teams won ugly with defense and other than the DWill team we have not been an offensive juggernaut. Too much roster turnover to build good cohesion and chemistry IMO. His best offensive team since is this one IMO.

I keep thinking of Bill Self at Illinois when we met him in 01. His team would make it a grinding war because they were not a great scoring team And they did get beat by a better offensive team (us). I think until he got to KU and had a much better scoring team he couldn't get to the FF and win it all. I assume that helps validate your point which I think is ypur strongest point about Miller getting over that elite 8 hump with offense

We're a good 2PT jump shooting team

azcat49 wrote:I will buy the Bowen comparison but Leonard was a terrible shooter in college too. I think RHJ can get there. He has the work ethic and he is already an elite defender.

Miller has won already consistently in March. HisXavier teams won ugly with defense and other than the DWill team we have not been an offensive juggernaut. Too much roster turnover to build good cohesion and chemistry IMO. His best offensive team since is this one IMO.

I keep thinking of Bill Self at Illinois when we met him in 01. His team would make it a grinding war because they were not a great scoring team And they did get beat by a better offensive team (us). I think until he got to KU and had a much better scoring team he couldn't get to the FF and win it all. I assume that helps validate your point which I think is ypur strongest point about Miller getting over that elite 8 hump with offense

Yeah this defintley is his best offensive team considering he has a great senior point guard, Stanley, and a handful of pretty good shooters.

On your point about roster turnover, it is sad but it is true. I really wish they would implement some better draft rules because the college game has been severely diluted these past 7 or 8 years.

RHJ has very similar stats to Richard Jefferson. RJ took a marginal offensive game and lock down defense into being a lottery pick and a very long and lucrative NBA career.

Not saying RHJ is RJ, he isn't, Jefferson just seemed to play smarter and not so out of control.

Rocky's utter cluelessness to advanced analytics is entertaining to say the least.

azcat34 wrote:Rocky's utter cluelessness to advanced analytics is entertaining to say the least.

WATCH THE GAMES!!!

This Saran Wrap thread would be better if it was bumped from last year. Otherwise it's just puzzling except for the blatant attention whoring.

I went poop

We're the fifth-best team in the country at shooting two-point jumpers.

So, yeah. This post is stupid.

salim'sheadband wrote:We're the fifth-best team in the country at shooting two-point jumpers.

So, yeah. This post is stupid.

But, but, but, but, but SHB. We only rank there because we attack the basket and blah blah blah. In all seriousness, I agree with you.

Merkin wrote:

azcat49 wrote:A Lute team shooting like that last night would have got beat. Instead with Miller, we win those ugly games

Don't think Lute would have left the starters in as long as Miller did to open up both halves.

I'm looking at you Mustafa.

Then you need to scrub your memory.

Mustafa did not earn the moniker of the "Golden Child" because Lute had a quick hook with him - ever. He gave him WAY too much leeway, while had a quick hook with others. It was a point of contention with many of Staf's teammates, who resented him because of it.

WildcatStunner wrote:

salim'sheadband wrote:We're the fifth-best team in the country at shooting two-point jumpers.

So, yeah. This post is stupid.

But, but, but, but, but SHB. We only rank there because we attack the basket and blah blah blah. In all seriousness, I agree with you.

Yeah that's true, it is because of that.

azcat34 wrote:Rocky's utter cluelessness to advanced analytics is entertaining to say the least.

You're right. The Wildcats are obviously an elite offense. Although I must say, it is a little worrisome that Oklahoma, UNC, Gonzaga, Kentucky, and Utah averaged out to 75 points against UCLA.

RockyRaccoon wrote:

WildcatStunner wrote:

salim'sheadband wrote:We're the fifth-best team in the country at shooting two-point jumpers.

So, yeah. This post is stupid.

But, but, but, but, but SHB. We only rank there because we attack the basket and blah blah blah. In all seriousness, I agree with you.

Yeah that's true, it is because of that.

No, it's not, because our field-goal percentage at the rim is 11th, at 67%. Two-point jumpers are an entirely separate stat.

Care to try again?

salim'sheadband wrote:

RockyRaccoon wrote:

WildcatStunner wrote:

salim'sheadband wrote:We're the fifth-best team in the country at shooting two-point jumpers.

So, yeah. This post is stupid.

But, but, but, but, but SHB. We only rank there because we attack the basket and blah blah blah. In all seriousness, I agree with you.

Yeah that's true, it is because of that.

No, it's not, because our field-goal percentage at the rim is 11th, at 67%. Two-point jumpers are an entirely separate stat.

Care to try again?

I think you got me for the most part.

That being said, I would like to see a shot chart on the Wildcats this season. How close are these two point jumpers they are taking? I question this because according to that same site the Wildcats are one of the fewest three point shooting teams in the country. That is a huge discrepancy. You would think a team that is confident and willing to shoot mid to long range two point jumpers would also shoot a fairly high amount of three pointers. I assume a huge chunk of those two point jumpers are Stanley's and Ashley's who both shoot a lot of close range shots.

RockyRaccoon wrote:

salim'sheadband wrote:

RockyRaccoon wrote:

WildcatStunner wrote:

salim'sheadband wrote:We're the fifth-best team in the country at shooting two-point jumpers.

So, yeah. This post is stupid.

But, but, but, but, but SHB. We only rank there because we attack the basket and blah blah blah. In all seriousness, I agree with you.

Yeah that's true, it is because of that.

No, it's not, because our field-goal percentage at the rim is 11th, at 67%. Two-point jumpers are an entirely separate stat.

Care to try again?

I think you got me for the most part.

That being said, I would like to see a shot chart on the Wildcats this season. How close are these two point jumpers they are taking? I question this because according to that same site the Wildcats are one of the fewest three point shooting teams in the country. That is a huge discrepancy. You would think a team that is confident and willing to shoot long two point jumpers would also shoot a fairly high amount of three pointers. I assume a huge chunk of those two point jumpers are Stanley's and Ashley's who both shoot a lot of close range shots.

I appreciate the concession.

I think we've been fairly consistent for the last two years in shooting a fairly minimal amount of threes. I cannot independently verify hoop-math's accuracy but KenPom has us 338th in the number of 3s we take, where hoop-math has us at 337th, so I think it's probably right around there.

Our offense is really pretty good this year. We get to the line regularly. The guys who take threes take them in the right spots, except for the occasional York heat check. Teams pack it in against us but we eak out every last little bit of juice inside the arc. We're shooting 53.6% from two overall, which is 13th best in the country (per KenPom). Rondae's been stroking it recently. Brandon has always been strong at that. TJ and Stanley. If someone wants to let us shoot 2s I think they'll find we're more than a match.

I appreciate the concession.

I think we've been fairly consistent for the last two years in shooting a fairly minimal amount of threes. I cannot independently verify hoop-math's accuracy but KenPom has us 338th in the number of 3s we take, where hoop-math has us at 337th, so I think it's probably right around there.

Our offense is really pretty good this year. We get to the line regularly. The guys who take threes take them in the right spots, except for the occasional York heat check. Teams pack it in against us but we eak out every last little bit of juice inside the arc. We're shooting 53.6% from two overall, which is 13th best in the country (per KenPom). Rondae's been stroking it recently. Brandon has always been strong at that. TJ and Stanley. If someone wants to let us shoot 2s I think they'll find we're more than a match.

No doubt the offense is pretty good this year and is probably the best Miller has had despite lacking a go to shooter which he has had in the past. If they are consistently hitting their mid-range jumpers and scoring in transition, they are one of the best teams in the country but in March you have to hit at least some three pointers or at least provide a threat to hit them when you are playing the best of the best. We will see what happens.

RockyRaccoon wrote:

azcat49 wrote:RHJ not progressing? He had like 22 points off his J last year and this year he has like 75. Dude is a sophomore. Read JMJ's comments and be enlightened. Will he ever be Salim or Kerr, no. But he has progressed.

TJ is a Better shooter this year. Probably just more confidence. York and Pitts are shooting it better. They have 9 managers who answer the call at anytime of the night to open McKale for extra shots. It's Not Miller so get off that train

Hollis-Jefferson is likely gone after this year. He can't shoot dude, don't kid yourself. Christ the guy has played competitive basketball his entire life, of course he can hit a wide open jumper every once in a while.

I just don't feel shooting is a priority to Miller.

RHJ has better shooting numbers across the board, not dramatically, but every category has improved. Despite being a focal point this year instead of an afterthought last year.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/pla ... son-1.html

Arizona ranks 7th out of 350 teams in overall field goal percentage. Kentucky is 44th.
Arizona is 5th in 2 pt jumper field goal percentage. Kentucky is 183rd.

Now, imagine for a second that Rocky was a Kentucky "fan" and started this thread. His hypothesis would definitely hold more water, and yet he'd get laughed off the internet just as fast.

Chicat wrote:Arizona ranks 7th out of 350 teams in overall field goal percentage. Kentucky is 44th.
Arizona is 5th in 2 pt jumper field goal percentage. Kentucky is 183rd.

Now, imagine for a second that Rocky was a Kentucky "fan" and started this thread. His hypothesis would definitely hold more water, and yet he'd get laughed off the internet just as fast.

As I said, I would like to see a shot chart on that.

Wouldn't matter what evidence or facts or stats or results you see. You'd still have the dense opinions you have.

Olsondogg wrote:Wouldn't matter what evidence or facts or stats or results you see. You'd still have the dense opinions you have.

If there is a shot chart that proves the majority of their two point jumpers are mid-long range, I wouldn't be able to say they are an "average" jump shooting team.

RockyRaccoon wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Wouldn't matter what evidence or facts or stats or results you see. You'd still have the dense opinions you have.

If there is a shot chart that proves the majority of their two point jumpers are mid-long range, I wouldn't be able to say they are an "average" jump shooting team.

Don't you WATCH the games???

The mid range jumpshot is a lost art and it is WAY more common to see players struggle with that shot at the college level than to be successful. So your eye test sucks and you don't watch enough basketball, basically.

Also, RHJ's big knock coming into college was his shot. I can't think of many shooters considered deficient or weak that turn themselves into much more in just one or two years. He has markedly improved over where he was last year.

Found some shot charts and they seem to prove my theory correct.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketb ... _ARIZ@WASH
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketb ... RIZ@WASHST#
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketb ... _UTAH@ARIZ
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketb ... RIZ@ARIZST
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketb ... _UCLA@ARIZ#

The majority of the 2 point jumpers for the Wildcats have been in the key or right at it. We are not exactly talking 18 footers here. I mean, does making a three foot "jumper" really make you a good shooter?

rgdeuce wrote:The mid range jumpshot is a lost art and it is WAY more common to see players struggle with that shot at the college level than to be successful. So your eye test sucks and you don't watch enough basketball, basically.

Also, RHJ's big knock coming into college was his shot. I can't think of many shooters considered deficient or weak that turn themselves into much more in just one or two years. He has markedly improved over where he was last year.

Believe me, that is not the only problem with RHJ's offensive game. I don't know if you can be considered a "slasher" when you get the ball stripped every other time you drive.

You know what else is in the key or right at it? Defenders. Hitting a contested jumper from 8 feet is harder than hitting an uncontested one from 18. Does your patented lazy eye test account for that?

Chicat wrote:You know what else is in the key or right at it? Defenders. Hitting a contested jumper from 8 feet is harder than hitting an uncontested one from 18. Does your patented lazy eye test account for that?

That is difficult to say for the Wildcats because they take so few. Can't compare the data. I'm just working with what I have.

Ashley is also a much-improved shooter from when he arrived.

Solomon Hill also extended his range. Made four treys as a freshman (22 percent). Made 57 as a senior (39 percent).

gumby wrote:Ashley is also a much-improved shooter from when he arrived.

Solomon Hill also extended his range. Made four treys as a freshman (22 percent). Made 57 as a senior (39 percent).

Ashley came in as a shooter. That is not just from me "WATCHING THE GAMES."

He has always hovered around 40% with his two point jumpers. You can compare the data between seasons http://hoop-math.com/Arizona2015.php

Solomon is a very good example of someone that developed under Miller, albeit one of the few.

Rocky, I missed the part where being a slasher was dependant on not having a loose handle? Rondae is quick and athletic. His offensive game relies on driving to the basket (and being aggressive on the offensive boards). When he gets the ball, he looks to drive just about every time. He goes to the free throw line a ton. He is a slasher.

Derrick Williams shot didnt improve? Fogg? Just a few more to throw out.

The man in my signature improved as a shooter under Miller. His slight dip from Sophomore to Junior year is attributed to his need to be more of a volume shooter and the teams main scoring option. He took a lot of tough shots.

rgdeuce wrote:Rocky, I missed the part where being a slasher was dependant on not having a loose handle? Rondae is quick and athletic. His offensive game relies on driving to the basket (and being aggressive on the offensive boards). When he gets the ball, he looks to drive just about every time. He goes to the free throw line a ton. He is a slasher.

He is a slasher. I guess what I should have said is he is not an especially talented one.

rgdeuce wrote:Derrick Williams shot didnt improve? Fogg? Just a few more to throw out.

lol

Read the entire thread friend-o.

RockyRaccoon wrote:

gumby wrote:Ashley is also a much-improved shooter from when he arrived.

Solomon Hill also extended his range. Made four treys as a freshman (22 percent). Made 57 as a senior (39 percent).

Ashley came in as a shooter. That is not just from me "WATCHING THE GAMES."

He has always hovered around 40% with his two point jumpers. You can compare the data between seasons http://hoop-math.com/Arizona2015.php

Solomon is a very good example of someone that developed under Miller, albeit one of the few.

Ashley was such an awesome shooter coming in, he took three 3 point shots his freshman year.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

RockyRaccoon wrote:

gumby wrote:Ashley is also a much-improved shooter from when he arrived.

Solomon Hill also extended his range. Made four treys as a freshman (22 percent). Made 57 as a senior (39 percent).

Ashley came in as a shooter. That is not just from me "WATCHING THE GAMES."

He has always hovered around 40% with his two point jumpers. You can compare the data between seasons http://hoop-math.com/Arizona2015.php

Solomon is a very good example of someone that developed under Miller, albeit one of the few.

Ashley was such an awesome shooter coming in, he took three 3 point shots his freshman year.

He has always had a very good mid-range, baseline shot.

That 2012-2013 season had a lot of other three point shooters: Lyons, Hill, Johnson, Parrom, even Jarrett and Mayes. He wasn't being asked to stretch the floor so much.

RockyRaccoon wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

RockyRaccoon wrote: Ashley came in as a shooter. That is not just from me "WATCHING THE GAMES."

He has always hovered around 40% with his two point jumpers. You can compare the data between seasons http://hoop-math.com/Arizona2015.php

Solomon is a very good example of someone that developed under Miller, albeit one of the few.

Ashley was such an awesome shooter coming in, he took three 3 point shots his freshman year.

He has always had a very good mid-range, baseline shot.

That 2012-2013 season had a lot of other three point shooters: Lyons, Hill, Johnson, Parrom, even Jarrett and Mayes. He wasn't being asked to stretch the floor so much.

Funny, I thought all those guys would be poor shooters due to their exposure to Miller.

And no, that doesn't make a difference. The motion component of Miller's offense regularly pulls bigs beyond the three point line. The shots are there for big guys. He didn't shoot them because he didn't have that range. He has always been a competent 15-17 foot shooter. His range has extended in his time here.

This whole silly argument boils down to one thing.

I call it "Searching for Salim 'Bobby Fischer' Stoudamire". Or "Searching for Sugarman Steve Kerr". Or, "Settling for Brendon Lavender". Still working on the title.

Point being, UA lacking a deadeye three-point shooter this season, gets conflated and confused with the idea that UA, as a team, can't "shoot". A myth fueled by fans who don't appreciate the numbers and by the media that doesn't do their research or actually watch the games. The two phenomenon are related, but ultimately separate considerations.

UA can "shoot", in fact they shoot the ball extremely well on the whole - #7 overall in FG% (.490), #20 in 2P% (.538) and an above-the-mean #125 in 3P% (.353). While UA's season-long FT% is subpar (.689), it is trending upward, at .729 on Pac-12 play (good for #3 in the Pac-12). Despite being #331 in 3PA, UA's eFG% is .535, #41 overall. Finally, UA's TS% (accounting for 2p, 3p & FT) is .570, good for #36 overall. They can shoot, period.

However, UA doesn't truly have a deadeye from behind the 3pt line. Ristic is 4/5 from 3 (sample size is an issue there), but UA's top 3 shooters from 3 (in both attempts and %) are all below 40% - Pitts (.386), York (.364) and Johnson (.361) - which is decent, but not superb. TJMC is 4th at .340, but it is worth noting that TJMC is shooting .440 in Pac-12 play (shooting 7/14 from 3 over the last 6 games).

Let's face it: UA fans were spoiled by two of the greatest shooters in CBB history. That's why my last title, "Settling for Brendon Lavender", suggests something slightly more realistic yet still useful, when you consider Lavender is T6th all-time in 3P% at UA (.411, along with Craig McMillan) and as a SR had the 4th best 3P% single season in UA history (.487). Can York or Pitts or McConnell or Johnson rise to that level down the stretch? I doubt it, but I wouldn't rule out the idea that collectively, UA can be productive from 3 in the NCAAs when it may be needed.

Merkin wrote:RHJ has very similar stats to Richard Jefferson. RJ took a marginal offensive game and lock down defense into being a lottery pick and a very long and lucrative NBA career.

Not saying RHJ is RJ, he isn't, Jefferson just seemed to play smarter and not so out of control.

Thats a lie he is Jefferson. Rondae Hollis-JEFFERSON!!!

I've said this before, I know, but at the risk of redundancy:

To succeed in March, your team only needs to do two things:
1. Create makeable shots.
2. Make them.

It doesn't matter where those shots are. Shaq was an awful jump shooter, but the dunk is a high percentage shot, and he created and made a lot of them. That's really it. Our worst stretches really aren't based in missing jumpers, they're based on TO's and not rebounding like we can.