- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
the lost art of scoring in college basketball
Posted on 1/31/13 at 9:53 am
Posted on 1/31/13 at 9:53 am
Guys leaving early for the NBA surely plays a factor, but the drop off in scoring over the last 20 years in pretty insane.
Cool SI article on this subject below.
LINK
Cool SI article on this subject below.
LINK
Posted on 1/31/13 at 10:02 am to Enfuego
quote:
Guys leaving early for the NBA surely plays a factor, but the drop off in scoring over the last 20 years in pretty insane.
Teams play D now that would change no matter what players left early for the NBA
Posted on 1/31/13 at 10:04 am to VerlanderBEAST
Running up and down the court like Loyola Marymount and the Billy Tubbs teams did might have sold tickets but in the end defense wins championships. The up tempo style is less effective today because there are too many athletes on almost every team that can keep up.
It's not about pure scoring, it's about efficiency. That chart is a bit misleading, I am sure the points per possession numbers today are equal or better than they were 20 years ago.
Offenses have slown down to become more efficient.
It's not about pure scoring, it's about efficiency. That chart is a bit misleading, I am sure the points per possession numbers today are equal or better than they were 20 years ago.
Offenses have slown down to become more efficient.
Posted on 1/31/13 at 10:07 am to Enfuego
There's just not as much room to operate now.
Players are bigger, more athletic, faster, and they defend more cutthroat.
Physical play is the true catalyst - watch old film and you can see how much space there is on the floor to operate.
Nowadays you often have to set 2 screens to get a shooter open for jump shot, a shot that still can be contested by an athletic defender fighting through a screen.
Players are bigger, more athletic, faster, and they defend more cutthroat.
Physical play is the true catalyst - watch old film and you can see how much space there is on the floor to operate.
Nowadays you often have to set 2 screens to get a shooter open for jump shot, a shot that still can be contested by an athletic defender fighting through a screen.
Posted on 1/31/13 at 10:15 am to Enfuego
Guys are alot more athletic on the defensive side of the ball nowadays
Posted on 1/31/13 at 10:16 am to Billy Mays
quote:so you think the level of play has improved since the early 90's?
There's just not as much room to operate now.
Players are bigger, more athletic, faster, and they defend more cutthroat.
Physical play is the true catalyst - watch old film and you can see how much space there is on the floor to operate.
Nowadays you often have to set 2 screens to get a shooter open for jump shot, a shot that still can be contested by an athletic defender fighting through a screen.
Posted on 1/31/13 at 10:18 am to Enfuego
Bo Ryan and Wisconsin are furiously fapping to that graph
Posted on 1/31/13 at 10:19 am to beaverfever
I don't understand. Some of the GOATS of basketball are from this past era of "inferior athleticism" some of you are referring to.
Posted on 1/31/13 at 10:19 am to Enfuego
I don't agree with the writer's argument that the 35 second shot clock hasn't contributed to lower scoring. He even stated that teams try to increase possession efficiencies. Teams like Butler and Wisconsin can increase efficiency while also lowering the number possessions in the game by grinding down the shot clock. This kills these teams overall scoring, as well as their opponents who can't push up the tempo.
Obviously the increased athleticism and length in the college game has contributed to lower scoring, but only really the best of the best high major conference teams have elite athleticism. Your average Southland conference game isn't featuring 6'8" small forwards with 7'0" wingspans.
Obviously the increased athleticism and length in the college game has contributed to lower scoring, but only really the best of the best high major conference teams have elite athleticism. Your average Southland conference game isn't featuring 6'8" small forwards with 7'0" wingspans.
Posted on 1/31/13 at 10:30 am to Enfuego
What is confusing about that to you?
Posted on 1/31/13 at 11:16 am to Billy Mays
quote:
Nowadays you often have to set 2 screens to get a shooter open for jump shot, a shot that still can be contested by an athletic defender fighting through a screen.
And an away player on a breakaway could get hauled down from behind with a flying tackle, and it's no better than 50-50 the ref would call a foul. Of course, it's no better than 50-50 that he dribbled the ball to get free in the first place, so I guess it all evens out.
Posted on 1/31/13 at 12:05 pm to Enfuego
yeah people act like this is because players are worse and shite but it's clearly because players are better IYAM. teams cant score that much because they are playing better defenders. simple as that. the bottom and middle tier D1 basketball players are so much fricking better than 20 years ago.
Posted on 1/31/13 at 12:18 pm to rockchlkjayhku11
quote:I think there is a good chance the really mediocre/bad teams are better than they were 20 years ago and that there is a bit more parity. But you don't actually think the level of play in college basketball is higher now than it was back then do you?
yeah people act like this is because players are worse and shite but it's clearly because players are better IYAM. teams cant score that much because they are playing better defenders. simple as that. the bottom and middle tier D1 basketball players are so much fricking better than 20 years ago.
Posted on 1/31/13 at 12:26 pm to Enfuego
Changes in offense have to be a factor as well IMO. Even guys like Rick Pitino who made his name at Kentucky with his fast paced offense doesn't run the same deal anymore. Everything is more defense oriented.
I also wonder if the steady decline of pure shooters in the game has an impact as well. It doesn't seem that you have as many guys who come into college ball anymore that are fundamentally sound shooters. I could be wrong though.
I also wonder if the steady decline of pure shooters in the game has an impact as well. It doesn't seem that you have as many guys who come into college ball anymore that are fundamentally sound shooters. I could be wrong though.
Posted on 1/31/13 at 12:49 pm to BluegrassBelle
quote:
I also wonder if the steady decline of pure shooters in the game has an impact as well. It doesn't seem that you have as many guys who come into college ball anymore that are fundamentally sound shooters. I could be wrong though.
you still have shooters in the HS ranks, but nowadays they get exposed on defense in college. fundamentals only can help you so much when you get blown by and outjumped
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News