Has anyone noticed the HUGE improvement in Cal's team shooting percentage this season?

From last season to this season, it is like night and day:

FG% from .406 to .470
2pt FG% from .452 to .514
3pt FG% from .286 to .384
FT% from .675 to .762

The credit here has to go largely to the players who have improved and the new players who have joined the team. But Head Coach Wyking Jones has had a big hand in this. He had an even more empty cupboard at the end of last season than he had when he was hired the year before. After last season he lost Lee, Okoroh, Hamilton, and Welle to graduation, and Coleman either quit the team or was coaxed to do so. What Jones did was to cut two more poor shooters, Winston and McCullogh, and he signed Andre Kelly, Matt Bradley, Jacobi Gordon, and Conor Vanover, all of whom can shoot a basketball. Kelly is leading the PAC12 in 2pt FG%. Matt Bradley is #3 in the nation in 3pt FG%. Conor Vanover leads the team in 2pt FG%, and is 3rd in 3pt FG%.

The returning players have improved some or all of their shooting from last season to this:

Darius McNeill:
FG% from .381 to .413
2pt% from .418 to .459
3pt FG% from .353 to .388
FT% from .741 to .813, excellent

Juwan Harris-Dyson
FG% from .493 to .548, very good
2pt FG% from .543 to .567
FT% from .573 to .714, excellent, but small sample

Grant Anticevich
FG% from .314 to .385
2pt FG% from .409 to .571, wow!
3pt FG% from .154 to .167
FT% from .769 to .667, a drop

Justice Sueing
FG% from .434 to .391, a drop
2pt% from .507 to .420, a drop
3pt% from .243 to .341, excellent
FT% from .746 to .825, excellent

Paris Austin, from his last season at Boise St to this season:
FG% remains the same at .491
2pt FG% from .530 to .527, about the same
3pt FG% from .212 to .316, excellent
FT% from .764 to .706, a drop

I'd have to guess that some or all of the returning players have had some instruction from Wyking Jones and his staff to help improve their shooting. I think it might be unusual for this many players to have improved their shooting this much over one summer, working alone by themselves on their shots. Jones at least should get credit for knowing a good D1 shooter recruit when he sees one. And after all the complaining he heard about Cal's recruiting and Cal's poor shooting last season, Jones should get a good share of the credit for molding this into what looks like a better shooting team than Cal has had in quite a while. Of course, Cal has not played in conference yet, so some of this individual improvement will likely slow down, but it is a good start. The big question remains, can he get them to play together night after night?

Dear SF: Your point is well taken. Let me offer another point: The greatest improvement a player makes in just all areas of his game occurs between his first and second year. All other improvements after the second year are incremental at best. The reasons for this are pretty obvious so I won't elaborate.

How can that possibly be the case?

I've read several know-it-all posters here who have assured us that our coach is a steaming pile of hot garbage, incapable of doing anything beyond wear a suit and walk the sideline.

SFCityBear said:

---

Has anyone noticed the HUGE improvement in Cal's team shooting percentage this season?

From last season to this season, it is like night and day:

FG% from .406 to .470
2pt FG% from .452 to .514
3pt FG% from .286 to .384
FT% from .675 to .762

The credit here has to go largely to the players who have improved and the new players who have joined the team. But Head Coach Wyking Jones has had a big hand in this. He had an even more empty cupboard at the end of last season than he had when he was hired the year before. After last season he lost Lee, Okoroh, Hamilton, and Welle to graduation, and Coleman either quit the team or was coaxed to do so. What Jones did was to cut two more poor shooters, Winston and McCullogh, and he signed Andre Kelly, Matt Bradley, Jacobi Gordon, and Conor Vanover, all of whom can shoot a basketball. Kelly is leading the PAC12 in 2pt FG%. Matt Bradley is #3 in the nation in 3pt FG%. Conor Vanover leads the team in 2pt FG%, and is 3rd in 3pt FG%.

The returning players have improved some or all of their shooting from last season to this:

Darius McNeill:
FG% from .381 to .413
2pt% from .418 to .459
3pt FG% from .353 to .388
FT% from .741 to .813, excellent

Juwan Harris-Dyson
FG% from .493 to .548, very good
2pt FG% from .543 to .567
FT% from .573 to .714, excellent, but small sample

Grant Anticevich
FG% from .314 to .385
2pt FG% from .409 to .571, wow!
3pt FG% from .154 to .167
FT% from .769 to .667, a drop

Justice Sueing
FG% from .434 to .391, a drop
2pt% from .507 to .420, a drop
3pt% from .243 to .341, excellent
FT% from .746 to .825, excellent

Paris Austin, from his last season at Boise St to this season:
FG% remains the same at .491
2pt FG% from .530 to .527, about the same
3pt FG% from .212 to .316, excellent
FT% from .764 to .706, a drop

I'd have to guess that some or all of the returning players have had some instruction from Wyking Jones and his staff to help improve their shooting. I think it might be unusual for this many players to have improved their shooting this much over one summer, working alone by themselves on their shots. Jones at least should get credit for knowing a good D1 shooter recruit when he sees one. And after all the complaining he heard about Cal's recruiting and Cal's poor shooting last season, Jones should get a good share of the credit for molding this into what looks like a better shooting team than Cal has had in quite a while. Of course, Cal has not played in conference yet, so some of this individual improvement will likely slow down, but it is a good start. The big question remains, can he get them to play together night after night?

---

Great post. That improvement in 3 pt shooting took us from #349 in the country last year to #42 this year.

SFCity:
Thank you for this. I knew the shooting was light years better, but these stats are very impressive. If we can only improve defense similarly, we'll have something.

One minor point. Vanover can't lead the team in 2 pt% if Kelly leads the Pac12 (unless his is higher but doesn't qualify).

UrsaMajor said:

---

SFCity:
Thank you for this. I knew the shooting was light years better, but these stats are very impressive. If we can only improve defense similarly, we'll have something.

One minor point. Vanover can't lead the team in 2 pt% if Kelly leads the Pac12 (unless his is higher but doesn't qualify).

---

Vanover's 2pt FG% is at .714. The websites probably have a minimum number of shot attempts to for a player to qualify for their list, and he doesn't play enough minutes to get the attempts, I'd guess.

Thanks for the stats. The shooting does seem significantly better. Still, we should probably wait until the end of the season if we are going to compare with end-of-season stats from last year. Of course, Cal could keep up the good shooting into conference play, given that the rest of the Pac-12 doesn't seem that good overall.

Now. About that defense...

AunBear89 said:

---

How can that possibly be the case?

I've read several know-it-all posters here who have assured us that our coach is a steaming pile of hot garbage, incapable of doing anything beyond wear a suit and walk the sideline.

---

Yeah, that pretty much covers it

Hasn't the shooting improvement ytd come against some of the weakest teams in the country?

Bear19 said:

---

Hasn't the shooting improvement ytd come against some of the weakest teams in the country?

---

Pre-season schedule has included St. Johns, Temple, USF, and Fresno St., all of whom are having pretty good starts. And with Yale, San Diego St and St . Mary's this looks like a normal pre-season schedule for Cal, and most of the Pac 12. But I would agree a full season of data will give us a more accurate picture of team improvement.

Free throw improvement is very noteworthy, and I would guess is not competition dependent.

The defensive decline in the this year's team versus Counzo's teams is on par with the Wilcox/Dyke's reversal. A couple of year's ago the Bears were one of the top teams in the country in defending the 3; this year.. oy vey.

Maybe we shoot better because we are expending less energy rebounding and playing defense? Fresher teams shoot better.

OneKeg said:

---

Thanks for the stats. The shooting does seem significantly better. Still, we should probably wait until the end of the season if we are going to compare with end-of-season stats from last year. Of course, Cal could keep up the good shooting into conference play, given that the rest of the Pac-12 doesn't seem that good overall.

Now. About that defense...

---

You are absolutely right. Now if only all the fans who have already condemned this coach and these players would oblige and also wait until the end of the season to make a judgment.........................

swan said:

---

Bear19 said:

---

Hasn't the shooting improvement ytd come against some of the weakest teams in the country?

---

Pre-season schedule has included St. Johns, Temple, USF, and Fresno St., all of whom are having pretty good starts. And with Yale, San Diego St and St . Mary's this looks like a normal pre-season schedule for Cal, and most of the Pac 12. But I would agree a full season of data will give us a more accurate picture of team improvement.

Free throw improvement is very noteworthy, and I would guess is not competition dependent.

The defensive decline in the this year's team versus Counzo's teams is on par with the Wilcox/Dyke's reversal. A couple of year's ago the Bears were one of the top teams in the country in defending the 3; this year.. oy vey.

---

Good question and very good response.

The are innumerable variables involved and precious few items that can be held constant* year to year. Rather than give you my own take, please use

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/california/

to compare the box scores of last year's "pre-season" games to those of this year. As you know
there many things to keep in mind about last year's team including:
. no legit PG
the "Don Coleman Effect"
McNeil was over 40% on threes for a good part of the season. He may have worn down.
(One of several reasons I like the reference database(s) is the ease with which one can
toggle between years)

Games of particular interest might be very close wins over Cal Poly and San Diego State both of the last two years

GO BEARS!!!! play some D

A huge factor in shooting percentage is shooting choice.

SFCityBear said:

---

OneKeg said:

---

Thanks for the stats. The shooting does seem significantly better. Still, we should probably wait until the end of the season if we are going to compare with end-of-season stats from last year. Of course, Cal could keep up the good shooting into conference play, given that the rest of the Pac-12 doesn't seem that good overall.

Now. About that defense...

---

You are absolutely right. Now if only all the fans who have already condemned this coach and these players would oblige and also wait until the end of the season to make a judgment.........................

---

A few things:
- Let's separate the criticism of the coach and that of the players. I've seen very little vitriol being leveled at the players. Granted, it's not as if I've read every post. If the players are being ripped, that seems misguided to me. (Note: saying Winston and McCullough probably weren't Pac-12 level players does not constitute ripping them I don't think).
- My suggestion about waiting until the end of the season was very specific and procedural: that if we are going to compare statistical shooting improvement with full-season stats from last year, then we should wait until we have end of season stats for this year where conference opponents are included. That being said, the improved shooting is indeed a (uncommon) positive data point.
- I don't think it's too early judge ineffective coaching, though we usually know more as time goes on. I am not comparing with any year-long stats from last year. I'm just using my eyes and seeing the wide open in-rhythm catch-and-shoot 3-pointers we are giving up repeatedly on defense. I'm seeing our inability to even try to get it into the high post and collapse the 2-3 zone on offense. You know far more about basketball than I do - perhaps I am looking at the wrong things. I'm sure our coaches (really all coaches) also know far more than me, but the end result looks terrible and that's easy for everyone to see. On defense most of all. I don't think most BB coaches could do my job either, but if they were my customers, they might still be able to figure out when I wasn't doing a good job and comment on some of the symptoms of my (hopefully hypothetical!) shoddy performance. Many of us get ripped and/or lauded all the time for our performance, and demanding that customers have patience only works for so long and only for some customers.
- That being said, other than cb80 and maybe one or two others, I think almost everyone has accepted that Jones is not going to be fired mid-season barring some specific transgression. Perhaps it will get better. Perhaps it won't. Right now my money is on "won't", but I would be happy to be wrong.
- I'll still keep going to the games and cheering the team as I always do (going with my son to the Seattle game), or giving away my tickets to Cal fans when I can't go.
- Best Christmas/Holiday wishes to you and all BI folks and Cal fans!

OneKeg said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

OneKeg said:

---

Thanks for the stats. The shooting does seem significantly better. Still, we should probably wait until the end of the season if we are going to compare with end-of-season stats from last year. Of course, Cal could keep up the good shooting into conference play, given that the rest of the Pac-12 doesn't seem that good overall.

Now. About that defense...

---

You are absolutely right. Now if only all the fans who have already condemned this coach and these players would oblige and also wait until the end of the season to make a judgment.........................

---

A few things:
- Let's separate the criticism of the coach and that of the players. I've seen very little vitriol being leveled at the players. Granted, it's not as if I've read every post. If the players are being ripped, that seems misguided to me. (Note: saying Winston and McCullough probably weren't Pac-12 level players does not constitute ripping them I don't think).
- My suggestion about waiting until the end of the season was very specific and procedural: that if we are going to compare statistical shooting improvement with full-season stats from last year, then we should wait until we have end of season stats for this year where conference opponents are included. That being said, the improved shooting is indeed a (uncommon) positive data point.
- I don't think it's too early judge ineffective coaching, though we usually know more as time goes on. I am not comparing with any year-long stats from last year. I'm just using my eyes and seeing the wide open in-rhythm catch-and-shoot 3-pointers we are giving up repeatedly on defense. I'm seeing our inability to even try to get it into the high post and collapse the 2-3 zone on offense. You know far more about basketball than I do - perhaps I am looking at the wrong things. I'm sure our coaches (really all coaches) also know far more than me, but the end result looks terrible and that's easy for everyone to see. On defense most of all. I don't think most BB coaches could do my job either, but if they were my customers, they might still be able to figure out when I wasn't doing a good job and comment on some of the symptoms of my (hopefully hypothetical!) shoddy performance. Many of us get ripped and/or lauded all the time for our performance, and demanding that customers have patience only works for so long and only for some customers.
- That being said, other than cb80 and maybe one or two others, I think almost everyone has accepted that Jones is not going to be fired mid-season barring some specific transgression. Perhaps it will get better. Perhaps it won't. Right now my money is on "won't", but I would be happy to be wrong.
- I'll still keep going to the games and cheering the team as I always do (going with my son to the Seattle game), or giving away my tickets to Cal fans when I can't go.
- Best Christmas/Holiday wishes to you and all BI folks and Cal fans!

---

+1

We'll see how it pans out as we enter the conference play. When we had Bird and Matthews, there was just that slight breaking point where the longer and more athletic teams would drive our shooting % way down, all it took was that defender's hand being a little closer or shaving a tenth of a second or two off the shot to disrupt us.

I'm still encouraged by the play of our Bears, even though this season looks to be another very rough one as a fan.

OneKeg said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

OneKeg said:

---

Thanks for the stats. The shooting does seem significantly better. Still, we should probably wait until the end of the season if we are going to compare with end-of-season stats from last year. Of course, Cal could keep up the good shooting into conference play, given that the rest of the Pac-12 doesn't seem that good overall.

Now. About that defense...

---

You are absolutely right. Now if only all the fans who have already condemned this coach and these players would oblige and also wait until the end of the season to make a judgment.........................

---

A few things:
- Let's separate the criticism of the coach and that of the players. I've seen very little vitriol being leveled at the players. Granted, it's not as if I've read every post. If the players are being ripped, that seems misguided to me. (Note: saying Winston and McCullough probably weren't Pac-12 level players does not constitute ripping them I don't think).
- My suggestion about waiting until the end of the season was very specific and procedural: that if we are going to compare statistical shooting improvement with full-season stats from last year, then we should wait until we have end of season stats for this year where conference opponents are included. That being said, the improved shooting is indeed a (uncommon) positive data point.
- I don't think it's too early judge ineffective coaching, though we usually know more as time goes on. I am not comparing with any year-long stats from last year. I'm just using my eyes and seeing the wide open in-rhythm catch-and-shoot 3-pointers we are giving up repeatedly on defense. I'm seeing our inability to even try to get it into the high post and collapse the 2-3 zone on offense. You know far more about basketball than I do - perhaps I am looking at the wrong things. I'm sure our coaches (really all coaches) also know far more than me, but the end result looks terrible and that's easy for everyone to see. On defense most of all. I don't think most BB coaches could do my job either, but if they were my customers, they might still be able to figure out when I wasn't doing a good job and comment on some of the symptoms of my (hopefully hypothetical!) shoddy performance. Many of us get ripped and/or lauded all the time for our performance, and demanding that customers have patience only works for so long and only for some customers.
- That being said, other than cb80 and maybe one or two others, I think almost everyone has accepted that Jones is not going to be fired mid-season barring some specific transgression. Perhaps it will get better. Perhaps it won't. Right now my money is on "won't", but I would be happy to be wrong.
- I'll still keep going to the games and cheering the team as I always do (going with my son to the Seattle game), or giving away my tickets to Cal fans when I can't go.
- Best Christmas/Holiday wishes to you and all BI folks and Cal fans!

---

Good discussion in this thread. I like SFCity's general premise, which is that coach has taken a ton of heat (not all unwarranted) for this team's failings, I think it is important to give credit where credit is due, and there has definitely been improvement in shooting percentages. But I also agree with OneKeg, you have to be careful comparing partial year stats against a full year (given the difference in strength-of-schedule between out-of-conference and in-conference play)..

Here is the comparison of shooting percentages against last year's team in the out-of-conference portion of the schedule only:

FG% from .435 to .470 (Lasy year: .435 OOC, .385 Con, .406 Overall)
2pt FG% from .469 to .514 (Last year: .469 OOC, .438 Con, .452 Overall)
3pt FG% from .333 to .384 (Last year: .333 OOC, .254 Con, .286 Overall)
FT% from .705 to .762 (Last year: .705 OOC, .642 Con, .675 Overall)

So this year, we definitely have improved across the board, even when comparing just to our out-of-conference percentages from a year ago, although not to the same degree. And, last year our percentage fell across the board once we got into conference play, and it is probably reasonable to expect a similar decrease this year. I do think we'll shoot better in conference play this year compared to last year (not a high bar), and Wyking does deserve credit for the improved shooting this year.

Sueing has changed his shot and that must have been due to the coaches. He does not shoot that big rainbow shot from the perimeter. This may have contributed to his slow start. In the last 4 games he is averaging nearly 20 pts per game.

Regarding our defense, here is the comparison of shooting percentages allowed this year versus last year's team in the out-of-conference portion of the schedule only:

FG% from .453 to .492 (Lasy year: .453 OOC, .489 Con, .471 Overall)
2pt FG% from .501 to .557 (Last year: .501 OOC, .533 Con, .518 Overall)
3pt FG% from .380 to .395 (Last year: .380 OOC, .418 Con, .399 Overall)
FT% from .731 to .762 (Last year: .731 OOC, .715 Con, .721 Overall)

So unfortunately, we're allowing our out-of-conference opponents to shoot better this year than we did last year. And if last year's trend holds, our Pac-12 opponents may shoot even better. At least our Free Throw "defense" improved in conference play last year ;-)

thx for stats Lou. very interesting and more objective, and confirms my feelings that we are shooting better than last year, but our defense is worse.

Defensively, I think we've dropped off is two reasons: freshmen defenders, and lack of rim protection.

what makes me concerned about our defense, besides that it is allowing higher shooting percentages, is rebounding, which i think is substantially worse than last year.

to account for the difference due to rebounding, I think one of the best measures is defense PPP. Ultimately that the stat that concerns me the most this season.

LOUMFSG2 said:

---

OneKeg said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

OneKeg said:

---

Thanks for the stats. The shooting does seem significantly better. Still, we should probably wait until the end of the season if we are going to compare with end-of-season stats from last year. Of course, Cal could keep up the good shooting into conference play, given that the rest of the Pac-12 doesn't seem that good overall.

Now. About that defense...

---

You are absolutely right. Now if only all the fans who have already condemned this coach and these players would oblige and also wait until the end of the season to make a judgment.........................

---

A few things:
- Let's separate the criticism of the coach and that of the players. I've seen very little vitriol being leveled at the players. Granted, it's not as if I've read every post. If the players are being ripped, that seems misguided to me. (Note: saying Winston and McCullough probably weren't Pac-12 level players does not constitute ripping them I don't think).
- My suggestion about waiting until the end of the season was very specific and procedural: that if we are going to compare statistical shooting improvement with full-season stats from last year, then we should wait until we have end of season stats for this year where conference opponents are included. That being said, the improved shooting is indeed a (uncommon) positive data point.
- I don't think it's too early judge ineffective coaching, though we usually know more as time goes on. I am not comparing with any year-long stats from last year. I'm just using my eyes and seeing the wide open in-rhythm catch-and-shoot 3-pointers we are giving up repeatedly on defense. I'm seeing our inability to even try to get it into the high post and collapse the 2-3 zone on offense. You know far more about basketball than I do - perhaps I am looking at the wrong things. I'm sure our coaches (really all coaches) also know far more than me, but the end result looks terrible and that's easy for everyone to see. On defense most of all. I don't think most BB coaches could do my job either, but if they were my customers, they might still be able to figure out when I wasn't doing a good job and comment on some of the symptoms of my (hopefully hypothetical!) shoddy performance. Many of us get ripped and/or lauded all the time for our performance, and demanding that customers have patience only works for so long and only for some customers.
- That being said, other than cb80 and maybe one or two others, I think almost everyone has accepted that Jones is not going to be fired mid-season barring some specific transgression. Perhaps it will get better. Perhaps it won't. Right now my money is on "won't", but I would be happy to be wrong.
- I'll still keep going to the games and cheering the team as I always do (going with my son to the Seattle game), or giving away my tickets to Cal fans when I can't go.
- Best Christmas/Holiday wishes to you and all BI folks and Cal fans!

---

Good discussion in this thread. I like SFCity's general premise, which is that coach has taken a ton of heat (not all unwarranted) for this team's failings, I think it is important to give credit where credit is due, and there has definitely been improvement in shooting percentages. But I also agree with OneKeg, you have to be careful comparing partial year stats against a full year (given the difference in strength-of-schedule between out-of-conference and in-conference play)..

Here is the comparison of shooting percentages against last year's team in the out-of-conference portion of the schedule only:

FG% from .435 to .470 (Lasy year: .435 OOC, .385 Con, .406 Overall)
2pt FG% from .469 to .514 (Last year: .469 OOC, .438 Con, .452 Overall)
3pt FG% from .333 to .384 (Last year: .333 OOC, .254 Con, .286 Overall)
FT% from .705 to .762 (Last year: .705 OOC, .642 Con, .675 Overall)

So this year, we definitely have improved across the board, even when comparing just to our out-of-conference percentages from a year ago, although not to the same degree. And, last year our percentage fell across the board once we got into conference play, and it is probably reasonable to expect a similar decrease this year. I do think we'll shoot better in conference play this year compared to last year (not a high bar), and Wyking does deserve credit for the improved shooting this year.

Thanks for the additional information, which I was to lazy to dig up. Of course it is much better, and more accurate to compare apples with apples, out of conference this year vs out of conference last year.

I can't understand the inclusion of FT% stats, because there is almost nothing Cal coaches and players can to to lower an opponent's FT%, except for calling time out to freeze the shooter and get him to think about the prospect of missing his free throw, or maybe the players trash-talking the shooter before or during the free throw attempt (Hoop Dreams - is this allowed under the rules?). Fans are not held to any strict rules, and many a free throw shooter has been distracted by fans behind the glass backboard waving handkerchiefs, and shouting at the shooter, or as in the case of ASU fans behind the basket using costumes and a script of going berserk to distract the shooter.

I think a better defensive stat to use instead of FT% would be FT Attempts allowed by the defense compared to last year. The Cal team that fouls more is not defending well, and depending on how good a FT% the opponent shoots, can and has cost Cal some games.

---

a Ref can call a T if a player interferes with a shooter, and that includes trash talking, waving their arms, etc.

I think FT shooting is a function of lots of factors:

shooting - how good the shooter is (form) including consistency (repeatability)
pressure - some players are clutch, others don't perform under pressure
fatigue - a tired shooter is not as good a shooter
focus - ability to block out extraneous stuff (e.g. fan noise, ASU curtain, etc)

A favorite quote of mine is when Monty was asked how can the coaches improve shooting. Monty, "recruit better shooters"

And that is a big part of it. All the incoming frosh are better than the players who left, and my guess is the returning players are slightly improved from last year.

But besides that coaches practice FTs form and situations. For example, a common practice technique is to put pressure on players such as the whole team running liners for a missed FT, and having the players take FTs on tired legs at the end of practice. Some even teach that you shoot differently when you're tired (e.g. aim for the back end of the hoop since your shot might be a little short...I don't like this as you are as likely to over compensate)

And then there is game day situations. For example, you can improve your FT shooting if you are leading because the other team is going to foul you at the end. Coaches design plays to have the best shooters fouled. Most offenses are designed to get your good FT shooters to the line. At the end of close games, coaches sub out bad shooters when they can, etc.

Now why would there be a difference in FT shooting percentages OOC vs In conference? I think it depends on which year. For example, last year we were winning most OCC games, while losing most Pac12 games. That means we were less often in the situations favorable to FT shooting during the Pac12 games compared to the OOC games.

but with out breaking it down game by game, it's anyone's guess

HoopDreams said:

---

a Ref can call a T if a player interferes with a shooter, and that includes trash talking, waving their arms, etc.

I think FT shooting is a function of lots of factors:

shooting - how good the shooter is (form) including consistency (repeatability)
pressure - some players are clutch, others don't perform under pressure
fatigue - a tired shooter is not as good a shooter
focus - ability to block out extraneous stuff (e.g. fan noise, ASU curtain, etc)

A favorite quote of mine is when Monty was asked how can the coaches improve shooting. Monty, "recruit better shooters"

And that is a big part of it. All the incoming frosh are better than the players who left, and my guess is the returning players are slightly improved from last year.

But besides that coaches practice FTs form and situations. For example, a common practice technique is to put pressure on players such as the whole team running liners for a missed FT, and having the players take FTs on tired legs at the end of practice. Some even teach that you shoot differently when you're tired (e.g. aim for the back end of the hoop since your shot might be a little short...I don't like this as you are as likely to over compensate)

And then there is game day situations. For example, you can improve your FT shooting if you are leading because the other team is going to foul you at the end. Coaches design plays to have the best shooters fouled. Most offenses are designed to get your good FT shooters to the line. At the end of close games, coaches sub out bad shooters when they can, etc.

Now why would there be a difference in FT shooting percentages OOC vs In conference? I think it depends on which year. For example, last year we were winning most OCC games, while losing most Pac12 games. That means we were less often in the situations favorable to FT shooting during the Pac12 games compared to the OOC games.

but with out breaking it down game by game, it's anyone's guess



This is all good information. We actually went 6-7 last season in OOC, and are 5-6 this season with one game to go. I think FG%, 3pt FG%, and FT% should perhaps go down in the conference because there is more pressure in those games. The conference games are more meaningful in terms of rivalries, a conference championship, and NCAA invitation and seeding. Half of our conference games are played on the road in unfriendly, even hostile at times, arenas. They all have their own characteristics and quirks. That floor in Oregon would drive me nuts, even while shooting a free throw. The rims are different, and so on. Whereas in the OOC, we are playing more of our games at Haas, and several of the road games are on neutral floors, not hostile arenas, with little fan impact on the atmosphere. Of course, playing Chaminade in Maui or St John's at MSG in NY is not really a neutral floor, more like an unfriendly arena with a home-town crowd. Temple probably had plenty of fan support in New York as well.

---

HoopDreams said:

---

a Ref can call a T if a player interferes with a shooter, and that includes trash talking, waving their arms, etc.

I think FT shooting is a function of lots of factors:

shooting - how good the shooter is (form) including consistency (repeatability)
pressure - some players are clutch, others don't perform under pressure
fatigue - a tired shooter is not as good a shooter
focus - ability to block out extraneous stuff (e.g. fan noise, ASU curtain, etc)

A favorite quote of mine is when Monty was asked how can the coaches improve shooting. Monty, "recruit better shooters"

And that is a big part of it. All the incoming frosh are better than the players who left, and my guess is the returning players are slightly improved from last year.

But besides that coaches practice FTs form and situations. For example, a common practice technique is to put pressure on players such as the whole team running liners for a missed FT, and having the players take FTs on tired legs at the end of practice. Some even teach that you shoot differently when you're tired (e.g. aim for the back end of the hoop since your shot might be a little short...I don't like this as you are as likely to over compensate)

And then there is game day situations. For example, you can improve your FT shooting if you are leading because the other team is going to foul you at the end. Coaches design plays to have the best shooters fouled. Most offenses are designed to get your good FT shooters to the line. At the end of close games, coaches sub out bad shooters when they can, etc.

Now why would there be a difference in FT shooting percentages OOC vs In conference? I think it depends on which year. For example, last year we were winning most OCC games, while losing most Pac12 games. That means we were less often in the situations favorable to FT shooting during the Pac12 games compared to the OOC games.

but with out breaking it down game by game, it's anyone's guess

---

Classic: Sonny Dykes, when asked how his defense might tackle better, replied., "recruiting". That dumpster fire of an excuse-maker threw his players under the bus!

Monty, with a similar answer: wisdom!

Bottom line, if things are going well and you're respected, everything you say is genius. If you've been struggling, you say basically the same stuff and you're an idiot.

But hey, I get it. Words are words.

Big C said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

a Ref can call a T if a player interferes with a shooter, and that includes trash talking, waving their arms, etc.

I think FT shooting is a function of lots of factors:

shooting - how good the shooter is (form) including consistency (repeatability)
pressure - some players are clutch, others don't perform under pressure
fatigue - a tired shooter is not as good a shooter
focus - ability to block out extraneous stuff (e.g. fan noise, ASU curtain, etc)

A favorite quote of mine is when Monty was asked how can the coaches improve shooting. Monty, "recruit better shooters"

And that is a big part of it. All the incoming frosh are better than the players who left, and my guess is the returning players are slightly improved from last year.

But besides that coaches practice FTs form and situations. For example, a common practice technique is to put pressure on players such as the whole team running liners for a missed FT, and having the players take FTs on tired legs at the end of practice. Some even teach that you shoot differently when you're tired (e.g. aim for the back end of the hoop since your shot might be a little short...I don't like this as you are as likely to over compensate)

And then there is game day situations. For example, you can improve your FT shooting if you are leading because the other team is going to foul you at the end. Coaches design plays to have the best shooters fouled. Most offenses are designed to get your good FT shooters to the line. At the end of close games, coaches sub out bad shooters when they can, etc.

Now why would there be a difference in FT shooting percentages OOC vs In conference? I think it depends on which year. For example, last year we were winning most OCC games, while losing most Pac12 games. That means we were less often in the situations favorable to FT shooting during the Pac12 games compared to the OOC games.

but with out breaking it down game by game, it's anyone's guess

---

Classic: Sonny Dykes, when asked how his defense might tackle better, replied., "recruiting". That dumpster fire of an excuse-maker threw his players under the bus!

Monty, with a similar answer: wisdom!

Bottom line, if things are going well and you're respected, everything you say is genius. If you've been struggling, you say basically the same stuff and you're an idiot.

But hey, I get it. Words are words.

---

so true

Big C said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

a Ref can call a T if a player interferes with a shooter, and that includes trash talking, waving their arms, etc.

I think FT shooting is a function of lots of factors:

shooting - how good the shooter is (form) including consistency (repeatability)
pressure - some players are clutch, others don't perform under pressure
fatigue - a tired shooter is not as good a shooter
focus - ability to block out extraneous stuff (e.g. fan noise, ASU curtain, etc)

A favorite quote of mine is when Monty was asked how can the coaches improve shooting. Monty, "recruit better shooters"

And that is a big part of it. All the incoming frosh are better than the players who left, and my guess is the returning players are slightly improved from last year.

But besides that coaches practice FTs form and situations. For example, a common practice technique is to put pressure on players such as the whole team running liners for a missed FT, and having the players take FTs on tired legs at the end of practice. Some even teach that you shoot differently when you're tired (e.g. aim for the back end of the hoop since your shot might be a little short...I don't like this as you are as likely to over compensate)

And then there is game day situations. For example, you can improve your FT shooting if you are leading because the other team is going to foul you at the end. Coaches design plays to have the best shooters fouled. Most offenses are designed to get your good FT shooters to the line. At the end of close games, coaches sub out bad shooters when they can, etc.

Now why would there be a difference in FT shooting percentages OOC vs In conference? I think it depends on which year. For example, last year we were winning most OCC games, while losing most Pac12 games. That means we were less often in the situations favorable to FT shooting during the Pac12 games compared to the OOC games.

but with out breaking it down game by game, it's anyone's guess

---

Classic: Sonny Dykes, when asked how his defense might tackle better, replied., "recruiting". That dumpster fire of an excuse-maker threw his players under the bus!

Monty, with a similar answer: wisdom!

Bottom line, if things are going well and you're respected, everything you say is genius. If you've been struggling, you say basically the same stuff and you're an idiot.

But hey, I get it. Words are words.

---

I would argue that it was a jackass statement by both of them and that we all know that Monty is prone to some jackass statements and gets away with playing the curmudgeon because of his years of success.

Obviously, if you improve your recruiting of shooters and tacklers your shooting and tackling improve. Equally obvious is that coaching and development can improve both as well. Almost equally obvious is that the question was clearly asking about the latter, not the former. I do think that Monty's response is more likely a glib response to avoid answering a question he found annoying by using humor to avoid it. Also, no one questions that Monty can teach shooting since he's had many great shooting teams. I also think that Dykes was not using humor but making an excuse. Context matters. Everyone questions Dykes' ability to teach tackling since his teams have all sucked at it.

I would have liked to see the reporter in Monty's case respond with "Ha Ha! Coach! But how do you improve the shooting of the players you already have?" I suspect if pushed we would have gotten an informative, intelligent answer.

OaktownBear said:

---

Big C said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

a Ref can call a T if a player interferes with a shooter, and that includes trash talking, waving their arms, etc.

I think FT shooting is a function of lots of factors:

shooting - how good the shooter is (form) including consistency (repeatability)
pressure - some players are clutch, others don't perform under pressure
fatigue - a tired shooter is not as good a shooter
focus - ability to block out extraneous stuff (e.g. fan noise, ASU curtain, etc)

A favorite quote of mine is when Monty was asked how can the coaches improve shooting. Monty, "recruit better shooters"

And that is a big part of it. All the incoming frosh are better than the players who left, and my guess is the returning players are slightly improved from last year.

But besides that coaches practice FTs form and situations. For example, a common practice technique is to put pressure on players such as the whole team running liners for a missed FT, and having the players take FTs on tired legs at the end of practice. Some even teach that you shoot differently when you're tired (e.g. aim for the back end of the hoop since your shot might be a little short...I don't like this as you are as likely to over compensate)

And then there is game day situations. For example, you can improve your FT shooting if you are leading because the other team is going to foul you at the end. Coaches design plays to have the best shooters fouled. Most offenses are designed to get your good FT shooters to the line. At the end of close games, coaches sub out bad shooters when they can, etc.

Now why would there be a difference in FT shooting percentages OOC vs In conference? I think it depends on which year. For example, last year we were winning most OCC games, while losing most Pac12 games. That means we were less often in the situations favorable to FT shooting during the Pac12 games compared to the OOC games.

but with out breaking it down game by game, it's anyone's guess

---

Classic: Sonny Dykes, when asked how his defense might tackle better, replied., "recruiting". That dumpster fire of an excuse-maker threw his players under the bus!

Monty, with a similar answer: wisdom!

Bottom line, if things are going well and you're respected, everything you say is genius. If you've been struggling, you say basically the same stuff and you're an idiot.

But hey, I get it. Words are words.

---

I would argue that it was a jackass statement by both of them and that we all know that Monty is prone to some jackass statements and gets away with playing the curmudgeon because of his years of success.

Obviously, if you improve your recruiting of shooters and tacklers your shooting and tackling improve. Equally obvious is that coaching and development can improve both as well. Almost equally obvious is that the question was clearly asking about the latter, not the former. I do think that Monty's response is more likely a glib response to avoid answering a question he found annoying by using humor to avoid it. Also, no one questions that Monty can teach shooting since he's had many great shooting teams. I also think that Dykes was not using humor but making an excuse. Context matters. Everyone questions Dykes' ability to teach tackling since his teams have all sucked at it.

I would have liked to see the reporter in Monty's case respond with "Ha Ha! Coach! But how do you improve the shooting of the players you already have?" I suspect if pushed we would have gotten an informative, intelligent answer.

---

This is a good discussion, and you had a good answer. I'd like to ask you how do you know Monty could teach shooting because he had good shooting teams? I've never had a coach who tried to teach players how to shoot. They all taught players how to work together and get open for shots, pass the ball to the open man. They designed plays for their best shooters, not for the average shooters. I have seen coaches teach their players new types of shots to use. They might teach a hook shot or a bank shot. In Allen Crabbe's case he learned a floater, but I think he went to a private coach for that, as I remember. In high school we were taught how to put the correct spin on the ball for a layup or short bank shot. Last night I watched Labron James and Steph Curry make float-type shots off the glass, with a great deal of spin. A player who can use spin effectively can make a variety of shots.

But that was the sum total of instruction we ever had in several years of playing in elementary school, middle school, Boys' Club, high school, and CYO. In the Boys Club, I had a former pro player teach us how to shoot blindfolded, sort of for fun. I went to a basketball school run by Hank Luisetti which included some Harlem Globetrotters and local stars for coaches, and there was very little instruction in shooting, if any. I guess what I'm saying is that I'm skeptical that players can be taught to become better shooters once they reach D1. Players can learn to pass up bad shots and take more open ones, and they can learn to extend range (Jerome Randle), but it takes physical characteristics to make a great shooter, a great eye, great hand and eye coordination, and the modern game requires more athleticism. He has to be able to watch great players shoot, and be creative enough to adapt a stroke for his particular body, and have the ability of great muscle memory. I learned a one hand push shot by copying Larry Friend of Cal. I learned bank shots from an All-City player, Denny Shutter. I learned a jump shot by copying Robin Freeman of Ohio State. I learned a hook shot by copying Bob McKeen and Jerry Lucas. I learned the floater by watching Al Buch, and had a little coaching from Cam Wall. Cam taught me to watch the defender's hands at all times, and create different shots, depending where his hands were. But Cam never told me how to shoot it. What shooters have you seen improve their shooting stroke through coaching? I'm not arguing with you. I would just like to be educated on how coaches can improve a player's shooting by teaching.

I'm sure that Wilt, Shaq, and Ben Wallace all had plenty of coaching to improve their free throws, but it never happened. How is Tyrone Wallace doing these days? He must be getting coaching on his shooting. Allen Crabbe is an interesting case. His percentage dropped during his three years at Cal. He gets to the NBA, extends his range and his percentage has been better, I think. Jaylen Brown was very unreliable 3-pt shooter at Cal, but on the Celtics he is one of their best 3-pt shooters, I think. I'd just like to hear evidence of players having improved by means of coaching, who their coaches were, and what did they teach? Great shooters are also very creative. Tom Heinsohn used to say he had to invent a new shot every year to be tough to guard. Larry Bird and Rick Barry invented different shots.

SFCityBear said:

---

...I've never had a coach who tried to teach players how to shoot. ....

---

Alloccco did at DLS but I have not seen evidence of it at Cal because I have no recollection of a Bear with bad shooting mechanics ever changing them during a stint at Cal. To go even further, I seriously doubt any coach at Cal ever told Jaylen Brown that it isn't a good idea to constantly dribble in a straight line down the center of the key knocking defenders over like so many bowling pins. This is a move he repeated to his last seconds of playing time for Cal. The Celtics got him to dump that move immediately.

SFCB, your valuable input makes you worthy of a deserving avatar. If I may be so bold as to make a suggestion:

I think all coaches teach shooting to various degrees, but without a dedicated time with a shooting coach there is only so much you can do, as the ncaa has limits on coaching time.

I think most coaches spend the majority of their coaching time teaching and improving their offense and defense, which includes adding options, plays and new concepts as the season progresses. There is also time needed to prep for opponents

There are drills for improving fundamentals such as shooting, passing, rebounding, etc, but a lot of this coaching is about when to take a shot, when to pass, etc, and of course point out things to individual players that they need to work on, including something they see of their shooting form.

players can and do practice shooting outside of their team's practices, but the most progress on improving shooting and adding a new offensive moves happen during the off season with dedicated coaches (not from the school).

of course the nba is totally different. all teams have dedicated coaches/trainers, with unlimited time, plus the facilities also

OaktownBear said:

---

Big C said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

a Ref can call a T if a player interferes with a shooter, and that includes trash talking, waving their arms, etc.

I think FT shooting is a function of lots of factors:

shooting - how good the shooter is (form) including consistency (repeatability)
pressure - some players are clutch, others don't perform under pressure
fatigue - a tired shooter is not as good a shooter
focus - ability to block out extraneous stuff (e.g. fan noise, ASU curtain, etc)

A favorite quote of mine is when Monty was asked how can the coaches improve shooting. Monty, "recruit better shooters"

And that is a big part of it. All the incoming frosh are better than the players who left, and my guess is the returning players are slightly improved from last year.

But besides that coaches practice FTs form and situations. For example, a common practice technique is to put pressure on players such as the whole team running liners for a missed FT, and having the players take FTs on tired legs at the end of practice. Some even teach that you shoot differently when you're tired (e.g. aim for the back end of the hoop since your shot might be a little short...I don't like this as you are as likely to over compensate)

And then there is game day situations. For example, you can improve your FT shooting if you are leading because the other team is going to foul you at the end. Coaches design plays to have the best shooters fouled. Most offenses are designed to get your good FT shooters to the line. At the end of close games, coaches sub out bad shooters when they can, etc.

Now why would there be a difference in FT shooting percentages OOC vs In conference? I think it depends on which year. For example, last year we were winning most OCC games, while losing most Pac12 games. That means we were less often in the situations favorable to FT shooting during the Pac12 games compared to the OOC games.

but with out breaking it down game by game, it's anyone's guess

---

Classic: Sonny Dykes, when asked how his defense might tackle better, replied., "recruiting". That dumpster fire of an excuse-maker threw his players under the bus!

Monty, with a similar answer: wisdom!

Bottom line, if things are going well and you're respected, everything you say is genius. If you've been struggling, you say basically the same stuff and you're an idiot.

But hey, I get it. Words are words.

---

I would argue that it was a jackass statement by both of them and that we all know that Monty is prone to some jackass statements and gets away with playing the curmudgeon because of his years of success.

Obviously, if you improve your recruiting of shooters and tacklers your shooting and tackling improve. Equally obvious is that coaching and development can improve both as well. Almost equally obvious is that the question was clearly asking about the latter, not the former. I do think that Monty's response is more likely a glib response to avoid answering a question he found annoying by using humor to avoid it. Also, no one questions that Monty can teach shooting since he's had many great shooting teams. I also think that Dykes was not using humor but making an excuse. Context matters. Everyone questions Dykes' ability to teach tackling since his teams have all sucked at it.

I would have liked to see the reporter in Monty's case respond with "Ha Ha! Coach! But how do you improve the shooting of the players you already have?" I suspect if pushed we would have gotten an informative, intelligent answer.

---

I thought Monty's comments were funny, in his usual dry humor kinda way

HoopDreams said:

---

..There are drills for improving fundamentals such as shooting, passing, rebounding, etc...

---

I trained my kids to dribble without ever looking down at the ball with these: