In partnership with CBSSports.com
The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web
The place to ask questions to SpartanTailgate's recruiting experts
"The Duff" is dedicated to Michigan State football recruiting discussion
"The Bres" is dedicated to Michigan State basketball recruiting discussion
This is your pulpit to preach to the masses about everything from politics to religion
The place to buy, trade or sell Michigan State tickets
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
I have read a number of posts this season calling out Izzo for historically having bad 3-point shooting teams. This is simply untrue. For the 15 seasons from 97-98 (earliest available data I could find) through the 11-12 season, MSU finished either 1st or 2nd in the conference 7 times in 3 pt percentage. Additionally over the 15 year period, only Indiana has made 3's at a better rate than MSU (see chart). Fact is, MSU has been a very good three point shooting team during the Izzo era.
Only Minnesota has made less and nobody attempts fewer....
MSU is terrible this year. That isn't a myth.
So in your mind high volume is better than high percentage? Ask Northwestern how far that has gotten them.
To that end, we are among the most efficient perhaps, though I'm curious if these stats include post season, which means we'd probably played more games than anyone in that stretch too.
When I look at 3 point shooting its more about how effectively are you scoring points... You want both, high freq and high percentage.
MSU at 31.8% this year is in fact terrible. The worst of the Izzo era. MSU's two best shooters have also been injured much of the year. I expect the number to go up to approx 34-35% this year, which will still rank below average for MSU.
Fortunately, Izzo made the Final Four with his two worst 3-pt shooting teams (98-99 and 00-01), so he knows how to win without the great 3-pt shooting. My post was more in reply to those who say we always have poor shooting teams.
If you could choose, would you rather go 2 for 3 from behind the arc in a big game, or 9 for 25?
Also, for you volume fans, the difference between the most makes (Illinois) and MSU over the 15 year period is 543. That is 36 per season, or approximately one make per game. Are you willing to sacrifice one made 3 per game for better shooting percentage and overall more efficient offense?
Oh my god, the poster is saying everyone shoots lights out against us, even WE DO!!!!!
All you have to do is average 1 point per possession for those other 22 possessions to beat 9 for 25. I don't believe MSU has ever been under 1 point per possession under Izzo. I'll take 2 for 3.
Let me get this straight. There are people in this thread who argue that jacking up threes on every possession would be better since we would make more of them
Put in Cousin!
Yeah, it's an interesting question. Given the fact that we tend to turn the ball over a lot and get a high percentage of offensive rebounds, the 9/25 might be better. But I don't know which I would take.
So if a team shoots 1 three a game and makes it. That qualifies as a good 3 point shooting team ?
Adding on to my previous post...
Last year, we averaged 1.037 points per possession. So in those extra 22 possessions, we would have 22.8 points. Let's round to 23, and say that's 29 points total in the 2/3 scenario.
If we go 9/25 from 3, that's 27 points. But you figure we get the offensive rebound on 4 or 5 of those 16 missed 3's, which would allow us to get more than the 27 points.
It's definitely close.
Geez guys, c'mon. Nearly everybody scorecards shooting based upon pecentage, especially once you get a high sample. Every team on this list is averaging between 14.5 and 17.5 attempts per game so we are not talking about a big range. MSU is at 14.5 and Northwestern is at 17.5.
Yes in your example it is close. But like I just posted, the average attempt difference between MSU and Northwestern is 3 per game, not a difference of 22 attempts in your example.
Also, interesting fact but MSU at 1.037 points per possession last year was the worst under Izzo. Many of his teams have been greater than 1.10.
Yeah, I hear ya.
Also, does momentum come into play at all? If two scenarios yield the same amount of points, should you take the one with more 3's since hitting a 3 can fire up a team more, therefore creating more momentum? Basketball is the sport where momentum and runs plays a huge part in the outcome.
I didn't ask the original question because I was on one side or the other. I've always wondered if it's more beneficial to shoot more 3's (a reasonable increase, not jacking up 3's every possession). Of course, it matters if these 3's are good looks as opposed to shooting them just to shoot them.
Either way, I suppose the key is having good possessions, regardless of whether that consists of shooting a 3's.
Is this another +/- stat?
Not sure I can quantify the answer to the momentum question. I do find it interesting that besides Illinois, all the high volume teams (PSU, UM, NW) are pretty much the least successful programs of the past 15 years.
We're the only team on that chart to have attempted less than 8,000 3s. It means we're getting higher percentage looks AND shooting at a decent clip from behind the arc when we shoot it.
tRCMB - Visit at your own risk of being disgusted.
I'm not so sure it is the team, but the number of players that when they were being recruited it was emphasized what great shooters they were. Once they got to MSU, they couldn't hit shots with any consistency. There was Klein, Chapelle, Ballinger, Hill (senior year), Joseph, Dahlman and now unfortunately Byrd. It seems Izzo always has a "shooter" that just can't... shoot. If these kids were good enough to get recruited because of their shooting prowess, then dang it they need to hit shots. Outside of Hill, most of these players didn't do anything else well enough to justify playing time.
FWIW, could you break out MSU's 3 point shooting with Crean and without him? Dude could coach shooters like none other.
Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.
I don't think you can leave Neitzel off that list. He was advertised as a great shooter, and while his shot slumped a bit his senior year when he was double teamed much of the season, he largely delivered.
Green became a far better shooter over the years, as did Suton. Several other examples. People only want to look at this one way, though.
Anyone. Anyplace. Anytime.
Neitzel, Green and Suton were not brought in to be outside shooting threats. They were mainly recruited to do other things. No doubt, MSU has had plenty of players develop, but Izzo primarily recruits wings to be the outside shooters. Granger and Suton both developed outside shots later in their careers, and were integral parts of some deep tourney runs. There just always seems to be that kid that couldn't hit water if he fell out of a boat, even though he was advertised as a dead-eye shooter.
I'm really surprised he left Chris Allen off the list. His first two years, Izzo kept repeating how Allen was the best "pure shooter" he had ever coached, while he was consistently at the bottom of the team in 3 pt. %. Dude was still a solid player, minus the off-the-court stuff.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports