at Bradley - 01/25/2023 - 7:00 PM - MVC TV (BSIN/BSKC/BSMW/BSS/BSSE/NBCSCH)

[Popsto4]

Offense is 281st in the country right now. The lowest it was under Muller was 240. Objectively, this would be the worst ISU offense since 2011.

I’m only playing the other side for the sake of conversation because I, mostly, agree there are pieces there to build on and the offense will get there with better players. I just don’t have blind optimism to say it’s the best our offense has looked in a decade when we have 9 assists and 24 turnovers. I want Pedon’s system, whatever that is, to work perfectly but to say we have something foundational right now feels a little skewed to me.

That was well put but did miss the mark. X’s and O’s doesn’t always stand out like a sore thumb, especially when a few needed pieces are missing. Pedon is running an offensive system that the talent he have to work with allow him to. The offense is what it is now but a long way to get to the offense he want. He know what he have and the pieces he need to turn the program around. With that being said optimism runs wild with me for the rest of this season, the next two and more for Pedon and his staff.

 

[SlackBooDom]

That was well put but did miss the mark. X’s and O’s doesn’t always stand out like a sore thumb, especially when a few needed pieces are missing. Pedon is running an offensive system that the talent he have to work with allow him to. The offense is what it is now but a long way to get to the offense he want. He know what he have and the pieces he need to turn the program around. With that being said optimism runs wild with me for the rest of this season, the next two and more for Pedon and his staff.

First message said the system is in place and our offense is the best it’s looked in a decade. This one says we are running the offense we have to because we don’t have the pieces. That’s why I’m confused on the system comment - that’s all. Plenty of reason for optimism and I’m on board. Just can’t say the offensive system is working when it’s worse than every year of the last ten was my point.

 

[BirdGrad2011]

First message said the system is in place and our offense is the best it’s looked in a decade. This one says we are running the offense we have to because we don’t have the pieces. That’s why I’m confused on the system comment - that’s all. Plenty of reason for optimism and I’m on board. Just can’t say the offensive system is working when it’s worse than every year of the last ten was my point.

Our offense looking better doesn’t necessarily mean it’s producing better results. For instance, last year Reeves carried a bad offense to decent numbers. Statistically they may have been better, but give me this years system.

 

[Popsto4]

First message said the system is in place and our offense is the best it’s looked in a decade. This one says we are running the offense we have to because we don’t have the pieces. That’s why I’m confused on the system comment - that’s all. Plenty of reason for optimism and I’m on board. Just can’t say the offensive system is working when it’s worse than every year of the last ten was my point.

Understood completely. I responded that way because the pieces that will return will know it even better so it’s working in that sense only. Grab a few by way of the portal and incoming kids and this same offense can be expanded to do many things/more action for options for a bucket. It’s gonna be interesting the next couple years for sure.

 

[SlackBooDom]

Our offense looking better doesn’t necessarily mean it’s producing better results. For instance, last year Reeves carried a bad offense to decent numbers. Statistically they may have been better, but give me this years system.

Am I reading correctly that you’re saying give you the worse offense with worse players? Some of the takes make more sense if that’s your view.

 

[Popsto4]

Am I reading correctly that you’re saying give you the worse offense with worse players? Some of the fakes make more sense if that’s your view.

Lol no way am I saying that. What I’m saying is this offense is a work in progress making progress and building towards next season’s offense right now. Albeit a few more pieces will be implemented making it a more easy flowing offense next year. It looks rough now as it’s nowhere near it’s final product minus those pieces missing. There’s this thing called process, trust me it’s in it right now.

 

[BirdGrad2011]

Am I reading correctly that you’re saying give you the worse offense with worse players? Some of the fakes make more sense if that’s your view.

If Reeves, Strong, Chatman and co. couldn’t win under Muller then it clearly wasn’t a good offense. Reeves is putting up big numbers at Kentucky. He’d make anyone look okay, but it didn’t translate. I’d bet that group would’ve done far better under Pedon.

 

[Phantom]

Right now we do a good job of getting to the line, and hitting FTs. We have some guys who can shoot. But I think we'd really benefit from a true center who can post up, and another guard who can break down defenses and create shots. We're starting to move a little better, in spurts, but need to be more consistent. Like Sto said, we need a few more pieces to really see what the system looks like. Pedon's gotta find those guys either in JUCO or the portal, and the rest of the guys need to live in the gym all summer. Strength and speed HAVE to improve.

 

[Popsto4]

If Reeves, Strong, Chatman and co. couldn’t win under Muller then it clearly wasn’t a good offense. Reeves is putting up big numbers at Kentucky. He’d make anyone look okay, but it didn’t translate. I’d bet that group would’ve done far better under Pedon.

That’s possible but just about impossible considering all the nuances of a new coaching staff and players. There’s much more to a basketball program than just X’s and O’s. Reeves is very good and is proven. That proof is certainly harder to show with so many variables involved. Putting up 80+ points doesn’t always prove better offense, what about the opposition’s defense?

 

[Popsto4]

Right now we do a good job of getting to the line, and hitting FTs. We have some guys who can shoot. But I think we'd really benefit from a true center who can post up, and another guard who can break down defenses and create shots. We're starting to move a little better, in spurts, but need to be more consistent. Like Sto said, we need a few more pieces to really see what the system looks like. Pedon's gotta find those guys either in JUCO or the portal, and the rest of the guys need to live in the gym all summer. Strength and speed HAVE to improve.

Now that’s on par with what I think. Consistency in getting buckets by way of an inside out game is key going forward. All I know is Mal probably have less open shot looks than anyone else on the perimeter. A big down low will allow the team to play inside out opening the floor for the shooters. Then I bet the popular thought would be man, wow what a great offense. To this point the offense would be a lot better with kick outs. There isn’t a problem with the guards we have getting into the paint right now. The problem is there isn’t a big to eat up the blocks or receive an assist when the guards do get there. We never get many inside assists which is overlooked in this team.

 

[SlackBooDom]

If Reeves, Strong, Chatman and co. couldn’t win under Muller then it clearly wasn’t a good offense. Reeves is putting up big numbers at Kentucky. He’d make anyone look okay, but it didn’t translate. I’d bet that group would’ve done far better under Pedon.

Okay and I bet they wouldn’t have. Neither of those things can be proven. Here’s the comparisons from last year’s offense to this year’s offense using NCAA ranks.

Efficiency: 137 vs. 281
eFG%: 51.8 vs. 49.2
Turnover%: 19.6 vs. 22.5
3P%: 36.9 vs. 32.5
2P%: 49.7 vs. 49.5

This year’s team is a better free throw shooting team, but they get blocked more and have the ball stolen more. Metrically, we do almost every single thing worse this year on offense. Pops’ point is that we have no bigs - that is obvious and an easy one to agree with. Will a good post or two make the system work better? I would think so, but that’s not a guarantee. Every single team in the country is recruiting good big guys.

The main point of this entire talk was - Pedon’s system is working. The offense looks better. We’re building it for next year. Those are all fine things in theory, but none of the numbers reflect that and it’s okay to temper some optimism given the facts at hand about that side of the ball.

 

[Popsto4]

Okay and I bet they wouldn’t have. Neither of those things can be proven. Here’s the comparisons from last year’s offense to this year’s offense using NCAA ranks.

Efficiency: 137 vs. 281
eFG%: 51.8 vs. 49.2
Turnover%: 19.6 vs. 22.5
3P%: 36.9 vs. 32.5
2P%: 49.7 vs. 49.5

This year’s team is a better free throw shooting team, but they get blocked more and have the ball stolen more. Metrically, we do almost every single thing worse this year on offense. Pops’ point is that we have no bigs - that is obvious and an easy one to agree with. Will a good post or two make the system work better? I would think so, but that’s not a guarantee. Every single team in the country is recruiting good big guys.

The main point of this entire talk was - Pedon’s system is working. The offense looks better. We’re building it for next year. Those are all fine things in theory, but none of the numbers reflect that and it’s okay to temper some optimism given the facts at hand about that side of the ball.

Yes I agree. Plus there is really no realistic way of comparing these two offenses. I don’t believe it’s ran the same as last year. Even if it were it still would be so much different because of different players. Metrics are a great tool of comparison in basketball when 90% or more regarding staff and personnel remain the same being able to give more probability and predictability as well. In other words this years offense really have so little compatibility with last years team/offense to make comparing the two pointless. I love the engagement here folks.

 

[SlackBooDom]

Yes I agree. Plus there is really no realistic way of comparing these two offenses. I don’t believe it’s ran the same as last year. Even if it were it still would be so much different because of different players. Metrics are a great tool of comparison in basketball when 90% or more regarding staff and personnel remain the same being able to give more probability and predictability as well. In other words this years offense really have so little compatibility with last years team/offense to make comparing the two pointless. I love the engagement here folks.

If pointless comparisons aren’t posted on a message board, then what are we even doing here?!

 

[Popsto4]

If pointless comparisons aren’t posted on a message board, then what are we even doing here?!

I just feel like comparing causes me to miss out or not see any progress currently. It’s just my take on it is all.

 

[ISU86]

If Reeves, Strong, Chatman and co. couldn’t win under Muller then it clearly wasn’t a good offense. Reeves is putting up big numbers at Kentucky. He’d make anyone look okay, but it didn’t translate. I’d bet that group would’ve done far better under Pedon.

2021-22 vs 2022-23
AVG: 20.1 vs 12.8
FG%: 47% vs 42%
3FG%: 40% vs 39%
FT%: 82% vs 80%

His FG%/3FG%/FT% are all down, and he is playing with (theoretically) better talent. He is not their number one target, so (again, theoretically) he is not the primary focus of the opposition defense. He is going up against better competition but "big" numbers those are not.

Last year's squad averaged 74 points. No matter how unpretty that was, it still produced above this year's 66. I believe it was the defense that was the weakest link.

 

[Popsto4]

2021-22 vs 2022-23
AVG: 20.1 vs 12.8
FG%: 47% vs 42%
3FG%: 40% vs 39%
FT%: 82% vs 80%

His FG%/3FG%/FT% are all down, and he is playing with (theoretically) better talent. He is not their number one target, so (again, theoretically) he is not the primary focus of the opposition defense. He is going up against better competition but "big" numbers those are not.

Last year's squad averaged 74 points. No matter how unpretty that was, it still produced above this year's 66. I believe it was the defense that was the weakest link.

Bingo

 

[RedbirdSoxFan]

Bingo

And Chatman did not play most of last season (which played a big part in the Redbirds lack of winning). Last year’s team had the same problem as this year’s team, no big down low.

 

[dpdoughbird06]

2021-22 vs 2022-23
AVG: 20.1 vs 12.8
FG%: 47% vs 42%
3FG%: 40% vs 39%
FT%: 82% vs 80%

His FG%/3FG%/FT% are all down, and he is playing with (theoretically) better talent. He is not their number one target, so (again, theoretically) he is not the primary focus of the opposition defense. He is going up against better competition but "big" numbers those are not.

Last year's squad averaged 74 points. No matter how unpretty that was, it still produced above this year's 66. I believe it was the defense that was the weakest link.

How did the averages break down with and without Chatman, though? Birds were flying pretty high - almost winning at Wisconsin by putting up 85 points - before Sy went down.

We scored 88 in his first game out, but if my crude cell phone calculations are correct including that game we averaged just 67 points per game after losing at Evansville.

 

[Redbirdfan06]

And Chatman did not play most of last season (which played a big part in the Redbirds lack of winning). Last year’s team had the same problem as this year’s team, no big down low.

We were 10-10 with Chatman. Two of those wins were against D2 teams. 3-7 without him. We played more games with him than not. And their offense with him was inconsistent. Last years team was still going to play on Thursday night with Chatman.

 

[ISU86]

How did the averages break down with and without Chatman, though? Birds were flying pretty high - almost winning at Wisconsin by putting up 85 points - before Sy went down.

We scored 88 in his first game out, but if my crude cell phone calculations are correct including that game we averaged just 67 points per game after losing at Evansville.

I came up with 68, so essentially same ballpark. There was also a coaching change at that exact same time (loss at Evansville) that Chatman went out.

My overall point had more to do with Reeves, that even though he is surrounded with a supposedly stronger supporting cast (and is not the number one option), has not put up better numbers.

But, to flush out more statistics:

Muller vs Jones | Overall
W-L: 10-10 (3-4) vs 3-10 (2-9) | 13-20 (5-13)
AVG-O: 78.3 vs 67.8 | 74.2
AVG-D: 76.0 vs 72.8 | 74.7

We should have been winning a lot of games averaging 78 points, yet were only 10-10 under Dan. Again, the offense may have been ugly at times, but that was not the end of the floor that was the issue. It was the ole' defense.

One thing I will give HCDM a tip of the cap to - seemingly more times than not, out of a timeout when we had possession, there was a play run that could produce points - which is not happening this year.