Why We Didn't Win -- Look Beyond Made Threes
-
After watching the game last night, looking at the numbers, rewatching most of the game this morning, I believe that we did not win this game because we did not match Nova in three point attempts. More precisely, faced with Nova’s shooting, we just didn’t give ourselves much of a chance. This created conditions where our victory probability was very low.
-
Not Winning vs. Why We Lost: The concept of “not winning” is different than “why we lost.” Let’s focus here on why we didn’t win. In other words, what were our chances?
-
Nova vs. Kansas/Three Point Percentages: A very odd fact. Right now, Kansas and Nova each have the same season shooting percentage from three point range – 40.1%.
-
All Things Being Equal: Importantly, if Nova doubles our three point attempts in a game, at a high rate, one would logically conclude that we would not win, correct? Thus if they shoot 40 threes, and we shoot 20 threes, and we’re both 40% three point shooting teams, the biggest slice of pie on the pie graph is a negative one, correct?
-
Three Point Attempts: For the game, Nova shot 40 three points, and KU shot 21.
-
Hindsight Question: Thus ask yourself, in hindsight, did we have a reasonable chance to win this game – even if Nova and Kansas shoot their season percentages from three? If they shoot their season percentages, it’s a blow-out, right?
-
Villanova Percentages (Game Saturday): Villanova shot just 45% from three in the game Saturday. That’s right, 45%. Not 55%, or 60%, but 45%. It just seemed worse, and it was early. Even if Nova just shot 30%, that’s 12 threes. That’s where the game would have tightened. They would have had to have shot 30%.
-
Kansas Percentages (Game Saturday): Kansas shot 7/21, or 33%. The @jaybate-1-0 trough he predicted.
-
Not That Easy: So we shot 7/21 you say, 33%? A trough? Not that easy. We’ve all been around this game long enough to know that we could easily run off 9/19 in the next 19 shot, and that gets us to 40%. Or could we run off 11/19 and get to the exact same game percentage as Nova. We just didn’t give ourselves a chance to win. We didn’t shoot that next block of 20 threes.
-
More Proof: Kansas has been shooting three pointers during this hot stretch, since back in mid-February, solidly over 40%. And oddly, since and including our blowout of OU at home, we’ve shot 44.6% from three heading into the Nova game. Why is that odd – well, Nova shot 45% last night. Essentially the same.
-
High Rate of Attempts: Before you say that “we’ve never shot 40 threes in a game this season”, we have shot 35 or over 5 times, the most recent being against Duke where we shot 36 threes. So we have been very high high volume.
-
Hindsight Answer: Seems pretty easy. Shoot more threes. Reverting to the mean, right? Our mean, since we transformed as a team (basically) is exactly what Nova shot last night, 45%. So if we shoot more threes, we progress closer to that percentage. In fact, it’s certainly possible we exceed it in our next 20 attempts by quite a bit. Shooting more threes in this game would have created a better condition for this team to win.
-
Not That Easy II: The astute CBB fan would say, “Well, shooting a contested look is not as easy as shooting an open look.” Correct. Seems easy. But our looks were contested and theirs, in large part, were not.
-
Conditions To Make Threes: Coach Self cannot make balls go in the hoop, and can’t make them stay out. But he, like Jay Wright, can create conditions that help or hurt the cause. What was our gameplan? What was Nova’s?
-
Cause For Not Shooting Threes (Option 1): Gameplan. Kansas, of course, was passive in creating open looks at the three point line, content to try to score inside with Doke, or on drives (which Nova helped on tremendously). This was how we played all season. This was Kansas. This did appear to be the game plan. Take control inside. At the very least, this was a “take what they give us” strategy. They guard the line, we go inside. They over commit, we drive. Pretty much what we’ve done. But certainly NOT creating three point looks. It’s what got us here.
-
Cause For Not Shooting Threes (Option 2): As we saw, Nova a was guarding the three point line with reckless abandon. They were in our face at every turn, particularly in the first half. So, the option then is to try to drive or pound it inside. This is the explanation of the passive commentator, though. They took it away, so we’re not going to take it back. We had no answer to their defense on the line. If our plan was to shoot threes, Nova actively, and impressively, tried to take it away.
-
Why Nova Made Threes – The Converse (Option 1): Nova had a clear gameplan to shoot the three ball, to create open looks, to drive and dish inside/out, to get Kansas defenders out of position, and to use their bigs to stretch the floor. They shot a number of threes likely banking on the fact that if they shot their season percentage, we would not be able to match it. And I’m guessing that Jay Wright may have employed this gameplan predicting our reaction. Any questions? This gameplan of Nova’s was a winner. Of course, no doubt, making the three pointers at a reasonable rate is key. And there was a clear path to losing with this strategy. All gameplans are a calculated risks.
-
Why Nova Made Threes – The Converse (Option 2): Nova took more threes (and thus made more) because the three point line was available. We just didn’t guard it aggressively. Ask yourself, did Kansas guard the three point line with reckless abandon? Hmmm. Perhaps the easiest answer of the day – no, they did not. The threes were so open, that it appeared that our gameplan was to permit shots from the three point line. I’ve seen multiple views on that this morning. Wow. Could we really have taken a “make it if you can” strategy? I personally don’t think so. I just think Nova was superior in this aspect, a true clinic in inside/out basketball. They got the ball in, and kicked it out. A bit different than our rotational schemes.
-
Match-Ups: I don’t want to overlook this. Nova’s bigs were a near impossible match for us, as it appeared last night. They were able to stretch the floor in a manner that we could not, and Doke couldn’t guard the line. Their big guys were able to pull ours away from the hoop, and were match up nightmares. Even with this, could we have still won? I believe we could have. But it is certainly a reason we lost. Again, making the shots was key here.
-
Nova The Better Team: I grant this conclusion, they are probably the better team. Let’s say they win a four game series, 4 games to 2. Or they beat us 3 of 5 games. But all that is irrelevant. It’s a one game playoff. We had a reasonable chance to beat Nova.
-
The Answer (Why We Didn’t Win): So why did Kansas not win? Why didn’t we really have a chance to win, looking at this now, the Sunday after? First, we did not shoot enough threes to match Villanova’s volume. Very little chance we could win based on season percentages when we shoot half their number of threes, and they shoot 40 total (meaning a high volume game). Based solely season shooting percentages, this is a loser in most scenarios. It’s certainly a higher chance Nova wins than loses. And maybe Jay Wright knew that heading in. This is a conclusion that is partially “in hindsight”, based on how the game played out. Could we have planned to shoot a high number of threes? Sure. But it didn’t look like it. Would we have shot more if available? Probably. But they weren’t. And Nova seemed intent on gunning from three point range as the core focus of their game plan. Second, we did not win because of gameplan. Because Nova was able to create open three point looks, because we couldn’t stop them from getting open looks, because we couldn’t get open looks, and because Nova defended the three point line with reckless abandon. Gameplan, scheme, preparation. This goes to the question of would we have shot more threes? I think we would have. We just didn’t have the plan to get the looks, and to counter their agressiveness.
-
Explanation: I think it is easy to say that Nova just shot the lights out last night, and that’s why they won. It is in large part why they won. There are other moving parts. It is certainly A reason. But it’s not the only reason. There are reasons why they were in a position to shoot so well. Search for the reasons. We saw reasons on full display. And let’s not forget that the quality of players – which team is the best collection of players, has a lot to do with that. Nova is very good. And matchups are key, as mentioned above with the bigs. But all of that are more reasons why we lost. The issue I’ve tried to address is why we didn’t win – why we weren’t in a real position to win. On a normal day, all things equal, we probably lose, I believe. But could we have won? No doubt. We just didn’t really have a chance.
-
Conclusion: Nova shot 40 three pointers and we shot 21. On an average day, on a day where both teams play their average game, we would have zero chance of winning (or something very near that). Considering all other variable, our chances increase of course (fouls, Doke going for 26, us getting easy baskets at the hoop, 20% shooting day for Nova from three, etc). And that is really the conclusion here. The high volume of threes by Nova created conditions where the largest probability was a Nova win. Pretty simple. Lots of other things could have conspired against Nova, including a cold shooting night. But Jay Wright rolled the dice that Nova could shoot a reasonable percentage.
This was a great season where we seemed to overachieve. We overcame many obstacles. And we reached the Final Four. Sure, we wanted the national title. We always do. But reaching the Final Four after years of falling short, and with this team – given where we were about 60 days ago – is pretty amazing. Winning the record breaking conference title. All of it adds up to a season that has no peer, but for winning a national title. It will go down as one of the top Kansas seasons. RCJH
-
-
We had one player all year that could create for himself and more importantly create for others, Devonte. It’s the reason the guy had to play 40 MPG. For all the talk of Malik in the postseason he is really just a streaky spot up guy with ZERO ability to drive, draw, and dish. Svi will drive but only left and is an easy scout. It is just like the Washington game. Play up on us and make us drive it. All the talk of modern basketball and Nova being able to shoot 3s from every position, people forget the triple threat. Their guys also have the threat to drive. Big difference.
-
@BigBad As hard as it is to admit this, watching Nova, I would conclude that they have better players. Their big guys were impressive. So you think it was Washington’s game plan?
-
Seemed similar to it. Hard guard the 3 point line and didn’t help on Doke. I have yet to watch the game again though to really try to examine it.
-
Yes, it is not that easy or that simple. You cite Villanova’s 45% shooting from the 3 as being just over their average for the season but that number is really missleading.
The game was won in the first half when Nova was shooting 13 of 21 or an unheard rate of 62%…that is right, 62% before missing the last 5 3-point attempts in the last 3 minutes of the half and still end up 13 of 26 or a still amazing 50% for the half and a 15 point lead and for all practical purposes the game was over. Keep in mind that it was not a 62% on a few lucky shots, it was 62% from 21 shots; I can’t recall a 17 minute first half stretch with those numbers for any team. The score for the second half, when a Nova shot a more down to earth 36% from 3 was a more realistic 48-47 or a 1 point advantage for Villanova.
-
I think the difference in this game was Nova’s players are better coached up. Athletically, I still give us an advantage. But the game is won with basketball IQ.
Think about this. The high basketball IQ players don’t have to be coerced into “getting up” for a game. They also learn how to stay focused through adversities… like playing in a Final Four. They know how to execute. They know how to adjust when the play isn’t going their way. They know how to play defense, both on-ball and weakside.
I lost my voice by halftime. I was screaming at the stupid TV until I couldn’t scream more. We gifted Nova so many freebie points with wide open trey shots, I couldn’t stand it.
Their ball movement was okay, not great. Their spacing was okay, not great. We kept doubling players and leaving guys wide open. Even the sportscasters mentioned it several times and they only see the obvious.
Anyway you want to look at it… their players played a smarter game. And that is what beat us. We were double-teaming Brunson sometimes with 6’5" Vick and 7’ Doke. That didn’t make sense. Everyone knew their big guy could bomb treys.
We fell behind so quickly and by so much we needed real changes in order to disrupt their flow and change the game. It only happened briefly when we flipped to zone. Even then… they still had open treys, just missed a few.
We can only coach up players so much. Time restrictions. But our coaches can appraise every player’s ability and can create their own personal development guide they can do on their own and with other players. Something needs to be done to help give our guys more basketball IQ. Some of that IQ is strictly knowledge, other parts of it requires learned physical skills along with it.
-
All and all… this was a GREAT season, filled with exciting basketball and with a team that could have easily lost our conference streak and failed early in March.
These guys deserve a lot of credit for stepping up to the plate and giving it their all!
-
As soon as it was 9-2 We looked like we were hit with a haymaker. Once it was 22-4 they were already mentally defeated.
Whatever they had worked on all week was gone because it was all about playing catch up. Taking 8 shots in the first 8 minutes was deflating. We couldn’t make shots or get them up. That killed everything. We looked slow and just not ready. Congrats to Wright for having them ready to go.
-
KU’s body language was terrible after Doke missed his second shot.
The effort went way downhill as well. I didn’t think the initial gameplan of playing through Doke was a bad strategy to open with. After Nova started making 3’s, KU started with Iso-ball and were sharing the ball and quit running their offense. KU ended up with 8 assists for the game.
-
Also, does this mean Villanova are the real Big 12 champs this year? They beat the top 3 teams in the Big 12 3 straight games from the Sweet 16 through at night.
-
We just looked totally unprepared. And the Doke game plan was flat out dumb. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a team give up on perimeter defense like that. This was an embarrassment that tarnishes the prior success of this season.
-
@HighEliteMajor I agree for the most part, rewatched some of the game this morning. I’ve mentioned it several times the last few years and I believe it to be true, we do not have the athletes that we need to win in the NCAA tournament (outside of JJ and Mason). Before 2014 very seldom did I come into a games thinking the other team is just better than us in terms of athletic ability, since 2014 it’s almost every game vs power 5 comp. Whomever is evaluating these guys isn’t doing anywhere near as good as Villanova, our recruiting classes have been better more often than not but they look like they have more talent and athletic ability than us.
-
BigBad said:
We had one player all year that could create for himself and more importantly create for others, Devonte. It’s the reason the guy had to play 40 MPG. For all the talk of Malik in the postseason he is really just a streaky spot up guy with ZERO ability to drive, draw, and dish. Svi will drive but only left and is an easy scout. It is just like the Washington game. Play up on us and make us drive it. All the talk of modern basketball and Nova being able to shoot 3s from every position, people forget the triple threat. Their guys also have the threat to drive. Big difference.
I think this will ultimately be a big difference next year. Dedric is a guy that can get himself buckets. Dotson and Grimes are creators. Dotson is very fast.
-
@BShark I’m hoping we at least one guy that can stop the dribble drive, we have not had that in years IMO.
-
@betterfireE well I’m hoping and I know that your more likely then not in the minority. Embarrassment? - -I’m feeling that your one of these fair weathered fans that always thinks that it un acceptable. unless we play that perfect next to perfect game. - -Embarrassment? - -you ever think that we might of just plain and simple got beat by the better team? - - It’s not the end of the world - the sky is not falling to lose to another # 1 seed - - a team that has been in what the top 5 of the top 25 all year long? - A embarrassment would be to lose to that # 16 seed in the 1st round of the tourney.
This team - this team right here , a team that was suppose to be one of our weaker teams in years but yet accomplished more then some of our more talented teams did in one of the rougher regions of the tourney - -Duke - -Michigan State etc. - -This team that people was saying this would be the year that our streak could quite possibly be broken of straight championships?
A team that not only won the Conference Championship - -AGAIN - A team that won the post Season Conference Championship - - A team that won the Midwest Regional - -A team that advanced to the Final four - -let me ask did our last years team as good as it was , with the National POY - with a 1st round pick in the NBA at the top of the 1st round art that - -did that team win the Post Season Conference Championship? - - Did that team win the Regional? - - Did that team make the final four? - the answer is - -a resounding - -NO . - but yet this team - -this team that’s an embarrassment did all the above with a make shift line up - -a team that had to have a football walk on try out to try and add depth - -any kind of depth to their roster - - a team that had to have another walk on a 6’4 walk on play quality minutes for some stretch ( Clay Young ) -a Team that had their post man go down from yet another injury for a little while - -This team yet accomplished more then other recent more talented teams of ours failed to do.
Embarrassment - -ummm no - NOT AT All at least not to the fans that really knows more then just the final score. - -This team sure the hell didn’t embarrassment me - or a lot of others that I know - - I’m proud of this team for what they did with what they had - -A team that had a kid that was playing in the NCAA tourney that was still in high school just a few months back and tossed into the fire - -Embarrassed ? - -Umm no I think not - -If you take your blinders off and wake up and really realize - they just got beat by the better team plain and simple - -that game was no fluke - - True they might have more 3’s then they have in the past - -but they have always been a really good 3 pt shooting team- -They are just a bad match up - -a very bad match up - - not just us -but for a lot of others also -that’s why they are 35-4 on the season - -that’s why they are playing for the National Championship. - - NOT because this was an embarrassment. - -ROCK CHALK ALL DAY LONG BABY
-
We thought we could beat them with Doke on the inside. For every basket Doke made, Spellman made several from the perimeter because neither Doke or De Sousa can cover anyone out there. We overextended, and double teamed on defense practically every possession, leaving someone wide open. On defense, they crowded the 3 point line as good as Tech did against us, and when we drove, they collapsed on us, and made it extremely difficult to get to the basket. This was a total team loss, as we were out coached, and out played. I think if we had played our best game of the year, we still would’ve lost. Give them their due- they will pummel Michigan, and win their 2nd national championship in 3 years. It’s been awhile since we’ve really been good on defense- my hope is next year we’ll finally have a good defensive team again.
-
kjayhawks said:
@BShark I’m hoping we at least one guy that can stop the dribble drive, we have not had that in years IMO.
Dotson has the attitude and the tools. Grimes has the tools. Next year can end up being a great defensive team, but with so many FR it will take time.
-
People will see the loss differently. Just remember that, no one likes to see this team lose and the fashion in which we did it wasn’t pretty.
I mean the announcers kept saying how shocked they were during the game how the game was going they certainly expected it to be close and competitive and it wasn’t.
I happen to feel nothing from this loss personally. It was over early, there was never a true moment KU was making a comeback. Sucks, we played so great to get here. Maybe we shot our shot against Duke. The mental hurdles we crossed beating them was huge. Losing to nova 2 yrs ago was tough to take given how close it was and in the nature of how the game got away from us. This one just felt over after 4 possessions which is never a good feeling
Anyways I wouldn’t take others opinions of the loss too serious, we are all a grieving bunch today. So close to glory but yet still so far…
-
betterfireE said:
We just looked totally unprepared. And the Doke game plan was flat out dumb. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a team give up on perimeter defense like that. This was an embarrassment that tarnishes the prior success of this season.
No, it didn’t.
-
kjayhawks said:
@HighEliteMajor I agree for the most part, rewatched some of the game this morning. I’ve mentioned it several times the last few years and I believe it to be true, we do not have the athletes that we need to win in the NCAA tournament (outside of JJ and Mason). Before 2014 very seldom did I come into a games thinking the other team is just better than us in terms of athletic ability, since 2014 it’s almost every game vs power 5 comp. Whomever is evaluating these guys isn’t doing anywhere near as good as Villanova, our recruiting classes have been better more often than not but they look like they have more talent and athletic ability than us.
Wow, a team hitting a lot more shots in one game than they did any other time becomes an indictment of recruiting for a period of years?
I think some people here need a major dose of overreaction antidote.
-
@KUSTEVE Good points. I wish someone would take Bill Self back to elementary school, and explain that 3 is bigger than 2. HEM was also making this point. Anyway, I have enjoyed reading (and posting a little bit). See you next year.
-
I am your choir and happily preached to.
PHOF
TOTAL 3 PTAs were the strategy that drove victory; that kept KU from reducing the game to tactics after tip off.
Everything else Nova did was tactics in support of the MORE THAN 3pt strategy.
A few years back I argued for shooting threes EVERY possesion and I still know this is the correct strategy and where the game will gravitate without further rule changes.
If KU shot all treys every possession and Nova shot the number and percent it actually did, KU would have won even at .35 make rate.
From the dominant strategy Nova imposes, KU simply defaulted into more and more complexity and unforeseen consequence.
Self actually magnified the advantage of Nova’s MORE 3PTAs strategy by choosing to drive to try to foul up Nova for 30 futile minutes.
KU became a 2 pt team playing a 3 pt team.
And in PPP terms more like a 1.5 ppp team playing a 3ppp team for 30 futile minutes.
Self made the worst move he could have made; I.e., trying to drive on a team the refs would never allow to be fouled up.
Perfect strategic storm beat downs occur when one coach picks an unbeatable and executable strategy and the opposing coach selects the a strategy that magnifies the advantage of the other team.
Self did this.
It’s counter intuitive, but when you are faced with a great three point shooting team the refs won’t call fouls on, your only chance is to shoot enough more treys than the opponent to offset your expected trough make rate. It’s simple mathematics and probability.
Note: I was not smart enough to forecast this spike trey before the game. I even suggested the driving strategy Self tried and said it probably wouldn’t work because refs wouldn’t call the fouls. But I am saying henceforth, any coach stupid enough to shoot less 3PTAs than the opponent deserves to lose and be horse whipped if one can find a horse! (Kudos to SJ Perelman if I recall correctly).
KU was probably going to shoot 35%.
Wright was probably going to increase 3PTAs to try to exploit our off night and any chance of Nova having an off night.
Self’s logical move was to in crease our 3PTAs to 50-55, if Nova shot 40 treys making 45%.
Shooting fewer treys against a good trey shooting team would be like saying, well, the enemy has switched from semi-automatics to automatics, so we are going to switch from semi automatics to single shots.
-
Combine higher 3PTAs than opponents with higher basketball IQ training and we are gold.
It will take both.
-
Villanova did not make “lucky” shots. By and large, their threes in the first half were either wide open or open shots. KU insisted on doubling the post, and Villanova has been deadly all year when they get the defense rotating. KU closed out late and Villanova punished them for it.
That’s where the lack of adjustments hurt us. Once we saw that Nova was able to diagnose the double team and swing the ball to open shooters, we should have called off the double teaming. We didn’t and the Wildcats feasted.
That’s not luck. That’s making open shots. Had we gotten that same quality of looks for our guys, we could have shot that way. We have shot that well for stretches, but typically when we have gotten hot, teams take away the highest quality looks.
Remember from Friday when one of our Bucketeers was mentioning how Svi hit some pretty ridiculous shots (10 in a row if I remember correctly) at the end of the shootaround.
We gave Villanova shootaround quality shots and they made them. That isn’t lucky. That isn’t even surprising. Give good shooters good looks and they will make them.
-
Some are under the impression that KU did not have a plan or had the wrong plan and will not even consider that maybe the players either did not follow the game plan or were just not a good match for Villanova’s personnel. This story illustrates Coach Self’s frustration by the lack of execution.
-
You to are making the point clearly.
There was almost no luck involved in Nova’s performance, except the good fortune of Self and KU electing a drive strategy that magnified the advantage of the strategy that Nova has won with all but 4-5 times this season.
Frankly, Nova only shot a little above its season average for the game.
This game could have been a MUCH bigger blow out, if KU had had one of its 19% trey games, of if Nova had had one of its peak shooting games.
KU was very, very VERY fortunate to “only” be beaten 95-79.
Self is going to learn something crucial from this experience.
This was a wood shed lesson that no one could overlook.
The lesson is college basketball is increasingly about:
a.) who can shoot the most open look 3ptas with the best shooters that are the hardest for defenders to alter their shots (tallest); and
b.) who can force the opposing team out the farthest with defense, while still being able to deny blow bys at the rim.
The game is now first and foremost about using point guards and drivers to force help NOT to take short threes, but to create wide open kick outs.
EVERYTHING offensive action that does NOT contribute to creating an open look trey EVERY possession is to be jettisoned.
Except when defending a huge lead with ten to go, no 2 point dunk should EVER be taken instead of a 3 PTA. Period.
What Nova did to KU means the cat is out of the bag.
Every coach with a bunch of long three point shooters and a guard that can drive it can win any game simply by taking 10 more 3ptas than an opponent.
Over the next five years, we can expect the average number of 3 PTAs to climb steadily from 25 to 35 to 45 to 55per game.
Three point shooting attempts are headed for the asymptote of the possible curve of total possessions.
Hide bound thinking is the only thing that has made it take so long to occur.
Balance between inside and outside scoring is obsolete.
Balance between corner treys from both corners is the new balance to achieve.
The new stressor of offense is the long corner shooter–the corner shooter that is too tall for his defender to block, even if he gets to the corner in time with a hand up.
The new stressor of defense is the defense that can guard trey shooters out to 30-35 feet to deny them open looks.
-
Only idiots claim Self had no plan for the Nova game.
Self had the exact wrong plan for what Wright schemed for Nova: 40 3PTAs on offense, and stretching to take away KU’s uncontested treys and giving them the mid range 2. Self told his players to take what they gave KU, as was his custom, and hoped that their ball screen defenses could deny the guard penetration that collapsed KU’s help defense for kicks to completely open looks at high percentage spots.
Wright was right. Self was wrong.
Even when KU executed what Self wanted it could not close the gap, even when Nova cooled to 35% for the entire second half!
Even genius makes mistakes.
Self gambles everything on a strategy he thinks has big risks, but big return.
Thus, he wins often and often beats teams that can’t counter what he does.
Wright took him one better. Wright gambled everything on a strategy that couldn’t lose with Self having KU drive. Wright even upped the ante by shooting more than their average number to 3ptas in expectation of Self driving, and as a hedge against Nova having an off shooting night.
Likely as not, if Nova had shot 35% the first half, Wright would have had them shoot even more treys.
This is where Self has to get to.
The worse KU’s three point shooting is, the more 3pt shots KU should take, when KU is playing another 3 point shooting team.
-
I’m amazed you watched the game a second time! I, true confessions here, turned it off shortly after Doke blocked a shot and they scooped it up and made a 35 footer. My only quibble with your excellent post @HighEliteMajor is that Nova made way above their season average percentage wise in the first half when they built the huge lead.
-
Frankly, Nova only shot a little above its season average for the game.
This game could have been a MUCH bigger blow out, if KU had had one of its 19% trey games, of if Nova had had one of its peak shooting games.
Villanova’s 3 point shooting percentage for the game is misleading. It was the 13 of 21 or insane 62% that it shot in the first 17 minutes of the game that allowed it to build a 17 point lead that basically won the game.
In the second half Nova shot 5 of 14 or 36% while KU shot 5 of 15 or 32% and the score for the second half was a measly 1 point difference or 48-47. Can you find another game where Nova shot 62% for most of one half and I don’t mean by taking a few but 21 shots? The first half of the game Nova shot way, way, way above its average and that decided the game. Had Nova shot its average during that time, say 9 of 21 or 42% that is a 12 point difference and this is a close game.
KU was very, very VERY fortunate to “only” be beaten 95-79.
I believe it is more correct to say that Nova was VERY fortunate to shoot that ridiculous % in the first half, which it obviously could not maintain in the second half, otherwise this is a different game.
-
@HighEliteMajor Like @wissox i thought the most amazing thing about your top notch post was that you had the stomach to watch the game again. It was one of those games were you could just feel it was over VERY early on. I will admit in an effort to not embarrass myself and lose my mind, i watched very little of the 2nd half and watched a movie instead.
What bothers me so much is that it is becomming a habit for us to lose in such a way that we humiliate ourselves on a national stage. Vick falling down and rolling around muliple times is the perfect example of not showing the world who we really were all year. 3 years in a row we have done this. I dont mind losing to a better team. I hate it but i can live with it. Laying a total egg in the E8 or F4 not so much. Maybe that is why we don’t get more national respect.
I do find it ironic that the only way to win this game would have required Bill to adopt the ultimate fools gold game plan. I know he was saying Let if fly, but deep down i bet Wright knew bill well enough that bill would never launch 50 3s. He still wanted to pound the post. Wright appears to own bill at this point. He has embarrased him twice now on the big boy stage.
It was brutal to watch the first time. You are a better man than me to watch it a second.
-
@jaybate-1.0 But don’t you think they will move the 3 pt line back…which might change that strategy?
-
@Fightsongwriter I Think we got too satisfied with being there and slept walked for the first 8 minutes. They got 22-4 early but once we settled in even with their hot shooting, they never really got us down more. That first wave won them the game. It’s pretty normal normal to see some beat downs in the EE and FF, lots of teams are just happy to be there (we’ve been on both sides of them). I disagree that we laid a total egg vs Nova in 16, that was damn good game, now we did against Oregon last year and Nova Saturday.
-
@Fightsongwriter @wissox It was actually easier to watch the second time. I was watching to see if what I initially thought was true. It seemed to me that Nova’s looks were amazingly clean, many uncontested in large part. I was also looking at something really worse – how easily Nova shut down our three point shooting, and how little we did to try to create those looks.
The fact is that Nova did both – they had a gameplan to shut our three point shooting down. And they had a plan to create open looks.
The fact is that we did neither – we did not stop their open looks, we did not get open looks.
So, some simply cite Villanova’s first half shooting percentage, and we walk away? That’s it, game over?
@JayHawkFanToo Do you ever ask the question “why?” Do you ever try to look deeper? Do you want to look deeper? Do you ever, in the deepest corners of your mind, consider for a moment that there is a reason why teams make shots? @justanotherfan said, “We gave Villanova shootaround quality shots and they made them. That isn’t lucky. That isn’t even surprising. Give good shooters good looks and they will make them.” That is the painful truth. It should resonate. It is a crisp analysis that resulted in a big loss.
And there is a “why” attached to that.
The results, what we saw on the court, and demonstrates what @jaybate-1-0 said. We just had the wrong game plan for this game. That happens sometimes.
@KUSTEVE Said, “We thought we could beat them with Doke on the inside.” Right, we did. I didn’t see that as a flawed gameplan before the game. I thought our normal mix of inside and out, and driving aggressively was how we played. It just didn’t work out.
In the end, in hindsight, the volume of threes shot by Nova, based on them making at or near their season percentage, was nearly possible to overcome given our volume of threes.
One thing I wish we had an answer for, that we saw in 2016, was how aggressively they played our offense around the three point circle, attacking handoff’s etc. I wish we’d had some looks to make them pay for the overplays.
-
mayjay said:
kjayhawks said:
@HighEliteMajor I agree for the most part, rewatched some of the game this morning. I’ve mentioned it several times the last few years and I believe it to be true, we do not have the athletes that we need to win in the NCAA tournament (outside of JJ and Mason). Before 2014 very seldom did I come into a games thinking the other team is just better than us in terms of athletic ability, since 2014 it’s almost every game vs power 5 comp. Whomever is evaluating these guys isn’t doing anywhere near as good as Villanova, our recruiting classes have been better more often than not but they look like they have more talent and athletic ability than us.
Wow, a team hitting a lot more shots in one game than they did any other time becomes an indictment of recruiting for a period of years?
I think some people here need a major dose of overreaction antidote.
I must have glazed over kjayhawks post before.
Some comments…
Long have KU fans bemoaned the lack of trey ballers. Well it’s hard to find elite athletes that are also elite shooters. They tend to end up in the NBA quickly.
So would you rather have Svi or Jamari?
To have guys that stay around, they need some kind of NBA deficiency. Dedric for instance is a terrible athlete* or he’d already be in the NBA. Like Perry he doesn’t really have a position in today’s NBA.
*FOR THE NBA LEVEL before anyone wants to tell me he’s a great athlete compared to 99% of the planet
Also if we are being completely honest, kids like Graham and Svi were not first choices. In their same class alone KU offered the likes of Stanley Johnson, Rashad Vaughn, Tyus Jones, Mudiay etc…
So many of these Nova players redshirted. KU fans would LOSE their mind if that happened here. Also Wright has been lucky with guys coming back. Mikal Bridges belongs in the NBA right now.
-
TL;DR KU’s recruiting and who they are targeting is fine, but you don’t always land your top targets unless you are Duke.
-
I heard Self say we’d need to play a near perfect game and Nova would have to be about average. I think, in hindsight, his offensive game plan was good.
KU shoots 40% average from three, we’d have two more makes: +6 pts
Doke gets at least 10 touches instead of 6, that’s at least three more makes: +6 pts
Guards only get blocked 3 times instead of 5 driving (or have fouls called): +4 pts
So, there’s 16 points right there without changing the game plan.
Nova shot 5% better than average from three… thats 2 extra makes: take off that 6 pts and it’s a totally different ballgame.
So, yes, KU had a very reasonable chance to win shooting half as many threes as Nova
-
jaybate 1.0 said:
The worse KU’s three point shooting is, the more 3pt shots KU should take, when KU is playing another 3 point shooting team.
Nope. Shooting 2s at 51% is slightly better than shooting 3s at 33%.
Unless you have a plan to get more possessions than the other team, there is no advantage in shooting more threes the way KU shot against Nova.
-
The KU offensive gameplan was actually quite good. KU took a couple of bad (i.e. quick) shots, but overall, what KU was doing (and trying to do) was both sound and effective.
My criticism is the defensive game plan. As @jaybate-1-0 said, the gameplan now offensively is to drive and kick to open shooters. Make guys chase the ball.
Daryl Morey (Houston Rockets GM) introduced a theory a few years ago that you basically want three types of shots - dunks/layups, three pointers and free throws. You want to minimize shots that aren’t one of those three types. The goal is to have roughly 80% of shots coming from either at the rim, or from three point range, with 20% or less being 2 point shots outside the restricted area.
Basically, it’s a mathematical argument. For good shooters, they won’t shoot all that much better from 15 feet in a game situation than they will from three point range - maybe 2-5 percentage points. So a guy that is a 45% three point shooter is likely only a 50% two point jump shooter at his best. The thing is, because of that, a guy that is a 45% three point shooter would need to shoot above 60% to make it worthwhile to shoot more than a few 2 point jumpers. It’s not just “long twos” that are bad. It’s the 14 and 15 footers, too.
Here’s a visual of the NBA shot chart from 2012-13:
Notice that shots from outside the paint are hovering just under 40%, while threes are just a few percentages below that.
Given that threes are worth 50% more, taking a two point jump shot is basically a fool’s errand if you have three point range. With the shorter college three point line, that matters double.
-
@DanR And remember, you have to play to your percentages. It is the correct answer of the course of a season. And what has been shown over the course of Self’s time at Kansas, the volume of threes doesn’t move the arrow on percentages much over the course of a season. The implication that fewer may mean better looks is proven to be fallacy (and I know you’re not saying that it isn’t). @justanotherfan, I think you are spot on here. Taking a two point jumper, if scripted, would never happen but for the flow of the game. I saw a number of HS game this season. It is just amazing how the game has totally changed since I played. the shot between 5 - 19 feet is a rare occurrence (and given what you’ve posted, it should be).
Like most everyone else, I guess I don’t fault our gameplan offensively going in. We played like we’ve always played. In fact, I’d begun to feel like Malik attacking the hoop was option 1.
-
Just curious what people’s opinions are on the several quick threes Newman and Devonte took. On one hand you see a guy dribble down the court and pull a moderately guarded three without any passes and think bad shot. I think I even heard self get on one of them after such a shot. But it’s not like moving the ball and running offense got any better looks. I don’t know if they are actually bad shots or not in the context of that game. Any thoughts?
-
benshawks08 said:
Just curious what people’s opinions are on the several quick threes Newman and Devonte took. On one hand you see a guy dribble down the court and pull a moderately guarded three without any passes and think bad shot. I think I even heard self get on one of them after such a shot. But it’s not like moving the ball and running offense got any better looks. I don’t know if they are actually bad shots or not in the context of that game. Any thoughts?
I thought they were bad shots. I believe Kenny Smith pointed out those two shots in particular on the broadcast as saying nobody had even stepped foot in the paint when they shot them. The Newman one was worse as the defender got his hand right there as went up with it. Graham has made that shot plenty over his career but I always thought they were low percentage shots. Hero Ball at its worst
-
@BeddieKU23 yeah. That was my initial reaction too. I believe the commentator pointed out you can “get that shot anytime” but the problem is we couldn’t. Whether it was our offense or their defense, the ball never made it inside out. I think I counted 3-4 of those hero ball thees. Take those away and out inabilities to create open looks from three is even more problematic.
-
@JayHawkFanToo I think you (perhaps not intentionally) highlight the more overlooked aspect of the game. Yes, Villanova opened up a big lead early with the onslaught of made 3s - and carried a 15 point lead at halftime with 13 made 3s. But, as you note, Villanova scored 1 more point in the second half - 48 - with just 5 made 3s. While Villanova is a VERY good offensive team, we managed to make them look GSW-like with really bad defense. They lit us up in the second half with only 15 of their 48 points coming from 3s. This was statistically the worst defensive team under Self (by far) and it showed in this game (painfully so).
The other issue that decided the game was how poorly we played in the first 8 minutes on the offensive end. Getting down 22-4 was a function of them not only making shots (22-2 run after Doke’s first score of the game), but our inability to do so. We played them even after the initial onslaught, but just couldn’t get the stops necessary to ever really close the gap.
-
@benshawks08 I think the feeling of desperation inspired those shots. We weren’t getting good looks as you noted.
@DCHawker Right, I think Nova exposed our defensive deficiencies. I think we could have really focused on guarding the three point line, during their hot stretch, perhaps playing a zone much like Duke did to us. Our zone didn’t cover the line.
It’s not that we lost. It’s just the way we lost that creates this entire discussion and has us scratching our heads. Looked like the KU/Duke semi in 1988 in the domination to start.
-
Doesn’t it make you wonder why we didn’t run the same defense Nova ran?
Why did we give away a dozen or so trey baskets in that first half, when the game was really on the line?
We always had a player or two floating around in between their man and the goal… floating in “weak-side help” land.
We needed to “man up” and each player be responsible for defending 1-on-1 on their man. It sure worked with Nova… they didn’t even double down on Doke most of the time (when he got the ball in the low post).
We were well-rested for this game, but we weren’t prepared for this game. At least, that is my humble opinion.
-
@benshawks08 I remember Malik taking at least 2 and Graham taking 1 3 pt shot without even passing the ball early in the possession. I also remember Newman taking 2 looong 2s with 1 foot behind the 3 pt line. Sure enough both shots were just a tad long. IIRC this was all before under 10 minutes in the 1H.
-
benshawks08 said:
@BeddieKU23 yeah. That was my initial reaction too. I believe the commentator pointed out you can “get that shot anytime” but the problem is we couldn’t. Whether it was our offense or their defense, the ball never made it inside out. I think I counted 3-4 of those hero ball thees. Take those away and out inabilities to create open looks from three is even more problematic.
In the first 7-8 minutes of the game we had 8 shots total and a bunch of turnovers ( I want to say 4/5 by that point). I believe Nova had already made 6 three’s and we hadn’t even attempted one. Once it hit 22-4 panic really set in. We made that run for a few possessions going to zone but as soon as they made an open 3 panic just set right back in and we left the zone.
The team was neutralized and it didn’t seem like anything KU did to adjust was working or even looked like there was an attempt to adjust. It just felt like once the score was getting out of hand the players were unable to mentally shake the deficit and play 0-0 ball which led to forced shots. Honestly I don’t know many that could just black that out after being hit with haymaker after haymaker. There was a point in the 2nd half Graham made a 3, Nova answers with one, Graham hits another, I believe Nova hit another shot. Graham shoots another shot (without passing that clanks off the back rim). That kind of basketball probably doesn’t happen if KU is in a manageable situation to comeback from which never felt like the case.
-
@benshawks08 There were 6 or 7 “hero” shots where we tossed it up from the Alamo, and hoped it would go in. Things like that happen when you fall behind 22-4. The entire year, our coaching staff has been imploring the whole team to help on defense, and then we run into a team that turns that against you when you do help. Give the devil his due- Villanova lost two starters during the year ( which is the ONLY reason they didn’t win the Big East ), and we caught them at full strength, going full bore. The things we used during the year that worked against other teams don’t work against Villanova. So, I sure hope when they come into AFH next year, we have a distinct strategy to take them down, because I’m sure getting tired of losing to them.
-
This was the best chance we had to get it under 10 and make it a ballgame. Down 14 at the 9:23 mark. Then… missed three threes in a row. (That one by Malik at 9:05, might have been one of his hero attempts.)
It’s worth noting that we should have fouled them a lot more, but that goes along with playing better perimeter D and contesting shots.
OK, I’m ready to move on.
-
Was that the one Garrett three that hit side backboard instead of rim? Man he’s got some work to do. Sounds like they will be changing his shot this summer
-
@HighEliteMajor I turned it off when we were down by 20. I’m on a spring break vacation with my son in the mountains of Montana. I figured no need to make myself miserable watching the rest of the game.
