DingleJerry wrote:Can't say I'm surprised to hear some of the fire Gard people pop up after the loss. B1G Championships two of the last three years and still bashing. I especially love the commentary about not trying for National titles even though they almost won 2 of them only 7 years ago. Still this is so frustrating after seeing Auburn lose too. You'd have had all home games and double digit seeds to the elite 8.
That said, I just can't believe a program that needs to be built the way ours is can't shoot better. This should be and is the number one priority in recruiting, almost every guy they get is supposed to be a lights out shooter. Yet, the results don't seem to come and shooting is a constant struggle. Every guy out there should be able to consistently hit wide open 3s. This shouldn't be so hard to do.
I get Davis has to go pro and take his money. But if I had to make a bold prediction I don't think he amounts to much in the NBA
After that note and the one about football last night, in my response I felt like I was suddenly channeling you and and Kerb. I became self-aware and had this step-away-from-the-computer moment
Here's what I'll say about shooting. I don't know how much merit it has, but it's something I've thought about...
The shooters we've recruited are
generally not the guys who have ended up being our main contributors. TJ Schlundt was supposed to be like the best shooter in state history, right? But that's the only skill he had at the D1, major conference level. As a result, he doesn't end up getting PT, never has rhythm, possibly even regresses instead of progressing. And it's all legit - can't play him if he's horrible otherwise.
But contrast that to a program like Colgate - or any other little program that always has knock-down shooters we lament about - and you can maybe piece together how it comes to be. They recruit shooters who might not otherwise have D1, major conference skills, but they play and develop their game, turn into players otherwise (maybe) because they're in a bad conference without the athletes and skill levels of the Power 5. I'm not convinced that those same guys who can shoot so well, placed on Wisconsin (or another Power 5 team) for their college career, develop into the same player and/or contribute in the same way.
Just think about the Colgate game. As soon as we started running them off the three point line their players looked absolutely useless. We couldn't translate that into playing OSU, MSU, even Northwestern and Rutgers. Those kinds of players would get abused. Single game match-ups might not show that, though, so when we do play a team like that, we're suddenly talking about how easy it is to just pick up and place one of their guys in our system. Some folks did it the last few days.
Now, this isn't to say that shooting isn't a problem. It is, and it's something we need to solve. Other teams in B10 and the P5 conferences do. But I call that out first just as a theory, and second to cut down some of the hot takes about losses. The problem with shooting isn't finding some random Joe that can shoot; we need to find actual players that can also shoot.
I will say, though, that compared to everyone not named Iowa in the B10, our shooting numbers from deep on the season aren't THAT bad. I'd suggest that the issue is more about a lack of depth, and our top shooter maybe being more streaky than most (not trying to start that again). We struggled because we didn't have Chucky - our #3 shooter from deep, believe it or not- Johnny was a mess, and Davison wasn't having a game where he can hit 3 or 4. Beyond those guys, you have Crowl and - heavy gulp - Lorne Bowman. Not a typo