Why this team is so BAD

[DiggerBuffs]

1. FG%-They have been under 40% in their last 7 games. If you can't make baskets, you lose. In all but one of our losses, we got beat in this category. In all but the Stanford game which was pretty much even, we shot a better % we were the better team. We can't hit a shot!
2. FT%-Lost the % battle the last 7 games as well. Have to make over 75%
3. "Ski"-While Askia Booker may be giving it his all, he's shooting under 27.5% in the last 5 games. That won't get it done. Booker is a streaky shooter and when he is your main component on offense, he can't have a bad game because he doesn't give you anything else. An average of just over 3 assists for a 6'-2" guard. He's a senior, I expected things to go to the next level for him and he's the same player as last year and they needed an improvement.
4. Hurt Scott-Scott not being able to help on the boards and clog up the middle or play for a long stretch is no help.
5. No confidence-A starting forward was 0/0 in a game? You can't have a player that is a starting caliber Pac 12 player disappear. The Buffs have at least one a game it seems.
6. Shot makers-The Buffs best shooter is a transfer in Josh Fortune.
7. Player Development-No one has got better. I don't know who to blame this on. Maybe what we saw last year and this year is the best but I think they are missing a floor leader in game that they can say, either this guy will hit some buckets or do what is needed defensively to win this game.
8. Atrocious on Road-Any team struggles away from home, but this team is just unwatchable.
9. Average at Home-Buffs have struggled holding home court. They lost winnable games to CSEwe, Washington and Cal at home. Those are games they HAVE to win.
10. Recruiting-The Buffs having 3-1st round draft picks and making the tournament has not alluded to landing top guys in recent recruiting cycles. It is showing against the Arizona types.

Tad is a hell of a coach and has an obvious passion for the game and for CU. I respect what guys like Ski have done for the program but the team obviously has leadership issues and it starts with the seniors. I think a guy like Fortune will step in and make a huge impact. They need an NCAA appearance in 15/16 and need to land a stud recruit that is considering more than lower tier programs/conferences.

How to be better in 2015/2016?
We saw last year that this team wasn't good when Dinwiddie was out. It has transpired to this year. They need an infusion of shot making and toughness. Hopefully Fortune solves some of those issues with his larger body at the 2 than Dinwiddie. Collier has to get thicker. He is the PG we need to see step up. He's just too small right now. Bad health killed his chances of being a big contributor. Talton is not a 22 mpg guy but a 12 mpg type. Tory Miller needs to play more to close out the season. He seems to want the ball and needs to develop some skills.

Keys:
-Scott stays healthy and averages 16/11
-XJ toughens up and averages 12/8
-Fortune shoots 45% and averages 18/4/5
-Collier shows what he did at East, leadership and floor general
-Miller, Gordon, Fletcher are all 5th-7th men that opposition fears
-Hopkins improves his ball handling and shows consistency this team needs to spell Fortune and/or Collier. We are thin at G.
-NCAA tourney
-A big time recruit

 

[Fight CU]

How dare you knock Ski

 

[tante]

1. Agreed but we are not taking smart shots, which is lowering our %.
2. agreed
3. See #1
4. he probably should sit, but he refuses to
5. Are you talking Wes or XJ here?
6. How do you know this? The guy hasn't play a single game here
7. Disagree DT is better, Wes is better and Jhop is better.
8. Then stop watching
9. Thanks captain obvious
10. So up your donations so we can pay these guys more.

 

[Buffnik]

I stopped reading when I saw FT% near the top of the list.

 

[Quattro]

I stopped reading when I saw FT% near the top of the list.

Yup, even more so 75% would be 6% over the D1 average this season

 

[blynch32]

I agree with the list, just not order in which they're listed. Nobody is immune to criticism on this train wreck-Including Tad, and the seniors. The program has to proceed with caution, a lot of progress has been made, and all could be lost with another year like this next year. I think a reload with some JUCO guys that are ready to play is a great first step to use the scholarship(s).

 

[Darth Snow]

I would respond, but then I realized that the OP is just a therapy vent post.

 

[MtnBuff]

I stopped reading when I saw FT% near the top of the list.

Read the list but FT% isn't the problem. Problem with FTs is that the offense is so non-functional that it isn't creating points by forcing fouls and FTs at key times.

We have long stretches of times when is seems like the last thing the offense wants to do is score points. In those stretches the only one who is agressive enough to create fouls and FTs is Ski, and he ends up doing it in a rush or out of control so his productivity isn't what it could/should be.

We can end up with the game stats looking fairly close in terms of FT attempts but in addition to going stretches of time without scoring baskets those stretches usually include very few points from the line as well.

 

[sackman]

The team is bad because it's devolved into a group of individual players as opposed to a team. Tad built the team, not through recruiting great players, but recruiting solid basketball players who could function well within the system he put in place. That fell apart this year.

 

[DBT]

I thought it was a damned good post.

 

[Buffnik]

Read the list but FT% isn't the problem. Problem with FTs is that the offense is so non-functional that it isn't creating points by forcing fouls and FTs at key times.

We have long stretches of times when is seems like the last thing the offense wants to do is score points. In those stretches the only one who is agressive enough to create fouls and FTs is Ski, and he ends up doing it in a rush or out of control so his productivity isn't what it could/should be.

We can end up with the game stats looking fairly close in terms of FT attempts but in addition to going stretches of time without scoring baskets those stretches usually include very few points from the line as well.

Yes. Free Throw Attempts is a key stat.

Quickly, here's how it works.

Data Assumptions (based on this season's stats at teamrankings.com).

1. Best FT% is 79.5%. Worst is 56.3%. Middle of the NCAA is 69.1%.
3. We'll normalize for the upcoming math with "best" at 80%, "worst" at 56% and "average" at 69%.
3. Best FTA rate is 26.4 per game. Worst is 13.2. Middle is 20.1.
4. We'll normalize for the math with "best" at 26, "worst" at 14 and "average" at 20.

Note: I did the rounding to give the best case for % mattering within the math and, likewise, the worst case for attempts mattering.

So, an average NCAA basketball team will attempt 20 FTs and make 69% of them, scoring 13.8 points.

The case for FT% (assuming average attempts):
- great % team will make 80% on 20 attempts to score 16 points. Versus an average team, that's a +2.2

The case for FTA (assuming average %):
- great FTA team will attempt 26 while shooting 69% to score 17.9 points. Versus an average team, that's a +4.1

The case for FTA is so strong that we can even look at a worst case scenario (great FTA and worst %):
- 26 attempts and only hitting 56% to score 14.5 points. Versus an average team, that's still a +0.7

Alternatively, a best case % team with a worst case FTA team:
- 14 attempts while hitting 80% to score 11.2 points. Versus an average team, that's a -2.6

Yes, missing FTs can be a killer within a given game. Especially situationally, such as in the last 4 minutes of a close game. But when you look at the math, the only conclusion is that the important thing to emphasize is the team actually getting to the line.

Relating this to CU, we're missing guys like Alec, Cory, Carlon and Spencer who were able to get to the line. Josh gets to the line and hits an elite percentage... when he's healthy. But his offense most of this season has devolved into open set shots because of his back injury. Also, unlike those other guys, even when he's healthy he's not someone who can create off the bounce for himself and our guards were **** about feeding him the rock. One of the easiest and most effective things that can be done for next season's offensive production is to make sure that every half court possession includes Josh (or Wes or Tory) getting an opportunity to touch the ball in a scoring position.

P.S. Best FTA and best % taken together is 80% on 26 attempts to score 20.8 for a +7 vs avg. Worst FTA and worst % taken together is 56% on 14 attempts to score 7.8 for a -6 vs avg. 13 points on FTs is the biggest possible swing, so FTs are important. Tad's philosophy of limiting attempts by not fouling on defense and (before this season) trying to generate a lot of attempts is the absolute right approach. As is his belief that there are more important things to spend time on at practice than free throw shooting so players need to take care of that work on their own time.

 

[seattlebuff]

Why we suck:

245th in FG%
267th in Assists/game
226th in Steals/game

These are not effort, mindset, leadership stats ... these are talent stats. Do you have the skill to shoot the ****ing basketball? Are your hands/feet/mind quick enough to intercept a pass? Do you see the open man to pass to, and can he finish at a better than average percentage? By and large, for most of the players on this team, we are way below the mean on all these fundamental measures.

 

[tante]

I understand the big picture in free throws and free throw rate, but while watching the game last night I did some napkin math. there was a point right before halftime that I realized that we could only be down 3 points (or something like this) if we did a better job at hitting free throws. It is upseting that the team is consistently throwing away points, even if they don't matter. I can even say if we fixed some "little things" we would be a lot better without need of therapy.

 

[Fight CU]

Why we suck:

245th in FG%
267th in Assists/game
226th in Steals/game

These are not effort, mindset, leadership stats ... these are talent stats. Do you have the skill to shoot the ****ing basketball? Are your hands/feet/mind quick enough to intercept a pass? Do you see the open man to pass to, and can he finish at a better than average percentage? By and large, for most of the players on this team, we are way below the mean on all these fundamental measures.

'This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains.' Think about that for a while."

 

[tante]

Why we suck:

245th in FG%
267th in Assists/game
226th in Steals/game

These are not effort, mindset, leadership stats ... these are talent stats. Do you have the skill to shoot the ****ing basketball? Are your hands/feet/mind quick enough to intercept a pass? Do you see the open man to pass to, and can he finish at a better than average percentage? By and large, for most of the players on this team, we are way below the mean on all these fundamental measures.

Why are steals/game such much more important in your world than limiting the other team to a low field goal percentage.

 

[Buffnik]

Why are steals/game such much more important in your world than limiting the other team to a low field goal percentage.

Tad is unlikely to have a team that forces a lot of steals. To gain something, you have to give something. Tad values FTA and defensive FG%. In order to generate steals you have to take defensive risks. Defensive risks lead to fouling more and to giving up a higher shooting percentage through the breakdowns.

Defend. Rebound. Avoid turnovers. Attack the basket.

That's what CU does when it's playing good basketball. It's a pretty simple formula.

 

[CVilleBuff]

Tad is unlikely to have a team that forces a lot of steals. To gain something, you have to give something. Tad values FTA and defensive FG%. In order to generate steals you have to take defensive risks. Defensive risks lead to fouling more and to giving up a higher shooting percentage through the breakdowns.

Defend. Rebound. Avoid turnovers. Attack the basket.

That's what CU does when it's playing good basketball. It's a pretty simple formula.

Virginia: #1 in points allowed at 49.9, 276th in steals at 5.4
Wisconsin: #9 in points allowed at 55.6, 335th in steals at 4.5

 

[DiggerBuffs]

They are not listed in terms of most to least important. I should have pointed that out. That said, this team during Pac 12 play has not shot FT at the above average clip they were the first dozen games. They keep getting worse. I get all the Ski love, 4 year player and amongst most prolific scorers, but the guy just shoots no matter what. That mentality will be better. Who knows how Fortune is but when Tad and others say he would be their best player if he was playing, I will agree with them.

 

[seattlebuff]

Why are steals/game such much more important in your world than limiting the other team to a low field goal percentage.

Steals just points to basketball intelligence and athletic ability to me ... quickness, anticipation, seeing the floor. But, yes, steals/game ain't our big problem.

But to your point:

- #101 in opponent FG%
- #153 in points allowed

While those aren't great numbers, and aren't Tadball numbers, you can win a decent amount of games with those rankings. You can't win, however, if you can't score. And we can't score:

- #257 in 3pt/game
- #200 pts/game
- #267 in assist/TO ratio

 

[Quattro]

They are not listed in terms of most to least important. I should have pointed that out. That said, this team during Pac 12 play has not shot FT at the above average clip they were the first dozen games. They keep getting worse. I get all the Ski love, 4 year player and amongst most prolific scorers, but the guy just shoots no matter what. That mentality will be better. Who knows how Fortune is but when Tad and others say he would be their best player if he was playing, I will agree with them.

Ski HAS to shoot as much as he does bexuse no one else will. I'm not sure why people don't understand that.

And actually we've shot 72.9% from the line in conference play, which is above average. But free throw percentage isn't nearly as important as getting to the line itself.

 

[blynch32]

They are not listed in terms of most to least important. I should have pointed that out. That said, this team during Pac 12 play has not shot FT at the above average clip they were the first dozen games. They keep getting worse. I get all the Ski love, 4 year player and amongst most prolific scorers, but the guy just shoots no matter what. That mentality will be better. Who knows how Fortune is but when Tad and others say he would be their best player if he was playing, I will agree with them.

To the people making excuses for Ski's shooting pct being what it is, because he "has" to shoot on this team. His pct this year is the same as when he was a junior and is higher then his sophomore year, when he didn't "have" to shoot because nobody else would. I don't know if there is a purer stat then fg pct, and yet some people on here twist it into a mess to justify your best player being a career .384 fg shooter. Great, his free throw pct went up.....bottom line is his game has grown very little from his sophomore year on the offensive end, and he's still taking the same type of shots he did then.

 

[Quattro]

To the people making excuses for Ski's shooting pct being what it is, because he "has" to shoot on this team. His pct this year is the same as when he was a junior and is higher then his sophomore year, when he didn't "have" to shoot because nobody else would. I don't know if there is a purer stat then fg pct, and yet some people on here twist it into a mess to justify your best player being a career .384 fg shooter. Great, his free throw pct went up.....bottom line is his game has grown very little from his sophomore year on the offensive end, and he's still taking the same type of shots he did then.

Do you watch the games...at all?

 

[MtnBuff]

To add the the FT conversation many coaches believe that when a team is in a scoring slump the best way to get out of it is to get to the line.

I don't know how you would quantify it but when players aren't hitting shots a trip to the line is a good way to build some confidence. When it seems like the point total on the scoreboard is "stuck" FTs are a good way to move it and start a team back into some offensive success.

This team has a lot of areas to criticize but in my eyes the thing that bothers me the most is when we go on those extended stretches that result in us not scoring for 8, 10, 12 minutes while our opponent is able to change the context of the game. We start with the teams within 5-8 points of each other and by the time we break the drought we are down by 15 or more and the game is essentially over.

If we had some players who were willing to agressively force the issue we would have a chance of getting some points from the line and turning momentum. Instead we end up passing the ball around the perimeter without even threatening to score until the clock is almost gone and end up chucking up a low percentage shot that ends in another empty possession.

 

[Darth Snow]

Usage Rate

To the people making excuses for Ski's shooting pct being what it is, because he "has" to shoot on this team. His pct this year is the same as when he was a junior and is higher then his sophomore year, when he didn't "have" to shoot because nobody else would. I don't know if there is a purer stat then fg pct, and yet some people on here twist it into a mess to justify your best player being a career .384 fg shooter. Great, his free throw pct went up.....bottom line is his game has grown very little from his sophomore year on the offensive end, and he's still taking the same type of shots he did then.

You realize it is harder to maintain efficiency (i.e. FG%) with a higher usage rate right?

So let's look at that just to see if your argument actually supports, or detracts from, your position on Ski. I will use Kenpom advanced stats AND the basic FG % for you to enjoy.

Year	Usage Rate (% Poss)	% Shots	Offensive Rating	Effective FG %	FG %
2015	32.3 (#12 in Nation)	36.8 (#3 in Nation)	103.4	45.4	.389
2014	27.0 (#198 in Nation)	30.2 (#98 in Nation)	99.1	43.2	.389​
2013	24.5 (#393 in Nation)	29.8 (#98 in Nation)	92.9	42.2	.364
2012	25.1 (#297 in Nation)	26.5 (#279 in Nation)	96.5	45.8	.402

What does this tell us? Ski had a sophomore slump, but has progressed significantly in the four years at CU. He's now much more efficient despite being one of the busiest players in the country. Yes, his field goal percentage has mostly been the same over the years, but he's figured out how to use his possessions better despite becoming the focal (sole?) offensive threat we have this year. Due to the added difficulty (i.e. he is taking more inefficient shots), his basic field goal percentage has not improved. However, he's making more assists, getting to the line more, and turning the ball over less while shouldering an insanely big portion of the offensive load.

TL; DR: Ski has progressed. You are wrong.

 

[DiggerBuffs]

Do you watch the games...at all?

How much do you have to in order to see he isn't a quality shooter? He has taken nearly twice as many shots as the next player. That isn't just "no one else will shoot". He hasn't grown much. He just has got more minutes and has done little with more on his shoulders. This team is the product of Askia Booker being your main guy and not a complimentary player to a stronger, better, more disciplined guard. He doesn't have someone to keep him in check.

 

[Buffnik]

You can't look at straight FG%. How effective you are as a scorer includes how often you get to the free throw line, whether you make them, and how often you're knocking down 3pt shots. I don't want to get into advanced metrics, so I'll keep it simple: how many shots did you take per point that you scored.

CU Player	FG Attempts	Points	Ratio
Askia Booker	373	440	1.18
Xavier Johnson	189	237	1.25
Josh Scott	154	237	1.54
Wesley Gordon	131	200	1.53
Jaron Hopkins	131	162	1.24
Xavier Talton	108	99	0.92
Tre'Shaun Fletcher	98	119	1.21
Dustin Thomas	96	114	1.19
Dominique Collier	93	92	0.99
Tory Miller	51	75	1.47
Eli Stalzer	20	13	0.65

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/stats/_/id/38/colorado-buffaloes

1. Earlier I said that the half court offense should run through a touch in scoring position by Josh, Wes or Tory next season. Every possession. The above is strong support for that.

2. Ski is grouped with pretty much everyone else despite the post- hip pointer struggles these last handful of games and in spite of the fact that he's the only guy other than Josh who always has defenders running at him and game plans built around stopping him.

3. Looking at the other guards on the team, it's horrible. J-Hop is the 2nd best scoring guard on this team (adjusting for Ski's usage & defensive focus on him -- or J-Hop would be 1st). Fletch, if you consider him a guard, is right with him. After that it's guys that the defense is game planning for... not to defend but to make sure they end up with the ball in their hands.

4. Efficient offense from the wing position (CU's hybrid G/F spot) is severely lacking. Those guys have to be better. To give a comparable, we can look at Andre Robertson's senior year. No one's ever going to say that he was a great scorer. He netted 337 points on 275 attempts for a 1.23 (not good). That's the level we're at this season from that spot. Looking specifically at XJ and his 1.25, in that same 2012-13 season when he was backing up Dre and splitting with Chen, XJ scored 295 points on 204 shots for a 1.45! That's what he's capable of as a player.

5. Last - for context the Buffs have attempted 1,444 shots in 27 games this season. That works out to 53.5 shots per game (let's round to 54). That means that every 0.1 on this efficiency measure is an extra 5.4 points per game. In other words, if Josh took half the shots (27) he'd score 41.6 points. If XT took the other half of the shots (27), he'd score 24.8 points. The defensive game plan against the Buffs is obvious and has pretty much been: stop Josh & Wes while making sure Ski doesn't get loose. That's sound because no one else is doing much and some guys are playing well below what they are capable of. Plus, if you harass Ski he's not enough of a PG to find passing lanes for Josh & Wes. Stack onto that a Josh Scott whose back doesn't even allow him to be an efficient post player along with a Wes who doesn't look for his shot and an XJ who would rather take an off balance 25 foot jumper than attack the rim... and we get what we've seen.

Cliff's Notes Version: This ain't on Ski, folks.

 

[MtnBuff]

Ski isn't a shooter, he is a scorer. Those two are not necessarily the same thing.

Ski is Ski, he is a guy who has always been capable of streaks of scoring points and streaks of being innefective. He isn't a vocal leader or a floor general, he's a guy who can generate points in the context of an offense and within the limitations of his size give you some solid defense as well.


What he isn't is another Spencer, or Burks, or Higgins, or Carlon, he's a different type of player.


He may take bad shots, he may dominate the ball, he may seem out of control. In my mind that is all part of the fact that he is a complementary player who has been forced into an uncomfortable role because we don't have anyone else who has stepped up to take positive charge of the team and the offense.


It's easy to get frustrated with Ski because the team is doing poorly and he has such a big role but it is probably much more rational to spread that frustration to the guys who should be taking bigger roles and haven't stepped up. To many guys who have dissapeared on the floor or the bench, to many guys dogging it. I'd rather have errors made with effort than someone who is invisible due to lack of effort or willingness to step up. For better or worse Ski has stepped up, if others had done so as well maybe he wouldn't feel like he needs to do some of what he is doing.

 

[Quattro]

How much do you have to in order to see he isn't a quality shooter? He has taken nearly twice as many shots as the next player. That isn't just "no one else will shoot". He hasn't grown much. He just has got more minutes and has done little with more on his shoulders. This team is the product of Askia Booker being your main guy and not a complimentary player to a stronger, better, more disciplined guard. He doesn't have someone to keep him in check.

Oh good god this is just awful

 

[seattlebuff]

All you really have to do is just watch how our already anemic offense stagnates even further when Ski's not on the floor. Sure, we may not jack up as many jumpers with 25 on the shot clock, but as many announcers have said when he's on the bench: "Where's the scoring going to come from?"

 

[absinthe]

Defensive risks lead to fouling more and to giving up a higher shooting percentage through the breakdowns.
.

Defensive risk taking results in what I call "the gabe york incident" from the last game.