This is becoming one of the favorite topics here on Scoop. We have some folks saying Gold has never been a very good shooter, or that he only had one hot streak last season, or that Shaka shouldn't be giving Gold so much freedom to take open 3s. And, of course, we have one joyless mope who can't mention Ben without ripping him.

I thought these stats from last season pretty strongly support Shaka's faith in Gold's 3-point shooting:

First 13 games (11/6 - 12/22) - 16-for-42 (.381)
Next 5 games (12/28 - 1/20) - 0-for-12 (.000)
Next 10 games (1/24 - 2/28) - 13-for-35 (.371)
Next game (3/2 v Creighton) - 1-for-8 (.125)
Final 8 games (3/6 - 3/29) - 12-for-20 (.600).

So Gold actually had three lengthy good-shooting streaks last season. And aside from those 6 awful games in which he was 1-for-20, Gold was 41-for-97.

That's .423 over 31 games, a significant sample size.

Now, one could argue that Gold shouldn't be shooting an average of seven 3s a game, as that's about double last season's average. Or that Shaka shouldn't build his offense around Gold (and I don't believe Shaka has). But I think we'd all be quite happy about any player shooting .423 from 3 over 31 games this season.

It's up to Gold to hit the wide-open shots that the Shaka/Nevada offense creates for him. Joplin, too. If they don't, I agree with the more "concerned" Scoopers about our prospects for this season.

However, I like to think that, over the course of a long season, each will shoot about what he did in 2023-24 (around 36%). Marquette can win lots and lots of games if they do.

Joplin hitting 40%, as he did as a soph, would be even better ... but that's another thread!

Quote from: MU82 on November 13, 2024, 05:36:04 PMThis is becoming one of the favorite topics here on Scoop. We have some folks saying Gold has never been a very good shooter, or that he only had one hot streak last season, or that Shaka shouldn't be giving Gold so much freedom to take open 3s. And, of course, we have one joyless mope who can't mention Ben without ripping him.

I thought these stats from last season pretty strongly support Shaka's faith in Gold's 3-point shooting:

First 13 games (11/6 - 12/22) - 16-for-42 (.381)
Next 5 games (12/28 - 1/20) - 0-for-12 (.000)
Next 10 games (1/24 - 2/28) - 13-for-35 (.371)
Next game (3/2 v Creighton) - 1-for-8 (.125)
Final 8 games (3/6 - 3/29) - 12-for-20 (.600).

So Gold actually had three lengthy good-shooting streaks last season. And aside from those 6 awful games in which he was 1-for-20, Gold was 41-for-97.

That's .423 over 31 games, a significant sample size.

Now, one could argue that Gold shouldn't be shooting an average of seven 3s a game, as that's about double last season's average. Or that Shaka shouldn't build his offense around Gold (and I don't believe Shaka has). But I think we'd all be quite happy about any player shooting .423 from 3 over 31 games this season.

It's up to Gold to hit the wide-open shots that the Shaka/Nevada offense creates for him. Joplin, too. If they don't, I agree with the more "concerned" Scoopers about our prospects for this season.

However, I like to think that, over the course of a long season, each will shoot about what he did in 2023-24 (around 36%). Marquette can win lots and lots of games if they do.

Joplin hitting 40%, as he did as a soph, would be even better ... but that's another thread!

Going back, Dallas infamous game. I was right there when team cane back to hotel, brick's mom gave Shaka a bear hug and lifted him about 6" from floor (she is taller than brick)and she said "thank you for all you do for our children" I posted it last year when it happened. I say, culture / family. I know MU dentists will say woke and suxs

Dude, how many MU dentists do think regularly post on this board? I'll help ya out. There are 2. That's about the same number as in all of fookin' PR. The 2 here are gonna say it loud and proud and are not easily muzzled. Not in our DNA, hey?

Quote from: 4everwarriors on November 13, 2024, 07:47:33 PMDude, how many MU dentists do think regularly post on this board? I'll help ya out. There are 2. That's about the same number as in all of fookin' PR. The 2 here are gonna say it loud and proud and are not easily muzzled. Not in our DNA, hey?

Dung post

How 'bout Ben Gold's shooting, though?

Quote from: MU82 on November 13, 2024, 08:07:26 PMHow 'bout Ben Gold's shooting, though?

It needs to be better

Quote from: 4everwarriors on November 13, 2024, 07:47:33 PMDude, how many MU dentists do think regularly post on this board? I'll help ya out. There are 2. That's about the same number as in all of fookin' PR. The 2 here are gonna say it loud and proud and are not easily muzzled. Not in our DNA, hey?

How do we verify this?

So back to Ben. Do we need to head on down to Lake Michigan with a beach ball?

I feel like this is a bit of cherry-picking though. You could do the same thing with a lot of players..."just take out that 1 for 20 stretch and his numbers aren't bad".

Quote from: The Thing on November 13, 2024, 11:23:27 PMI feel like this is a bit of cherry-picking though. You could do the same thing with a lot of players..."just take out that 1 for 20 stretch and his numbers aren't bad".

I get it. But in another thread, we had a Scooper saying Gokd only had one good stretch (which is false). We had others suggesting that Gold was wildly inconsistent; the stats would suggest that wasn't really true last season - he had only one bad 5-game stretch but otherwise was pretty dependable.

Again, I don't think a 31-game sample size is bad cherry-picking.

What nobody is disputing is that Gold needs to shoot better than he has so far this season. We can't beat good teams if he and Jop are firing scuds.

Play with excluding this or that part of the sample, but fact remains dude is 32.4% career and 19% this year. Not terrible, but nowhere near what is needed to justify his other limitations. Plus, the line drive - not a shot built for 40%+.

But he's what we've got so I wish him all the best and hope he does shoot 36% this year - but he mostly is what he is - I'd be shocked if his game/shooting radically transforms at this point. I have no doubt he'll show up huge in a few games and knock down some major shots. But as a key and consistent part of the offense I don't see it. Thus, I think a better/more likely/more hopeful path to late season success is that we see the Freshman making big strides (which they may or may not do) and eat his minutes. My guess is our season will have been much more successful if the finally tally shows Ben at 15-20mpg rather than 20-25mpg.

 

Quote from: DoctorV on November 13, 2024, 11:10:37 PMHow do we verify this?

The board has several dentist wannabes. Unfortunately, they lack the necessary gray matter, aina?

Quote from: 4everwarriors on November 14, 2024, 06:54:21 AMThe board has several dentist wannabes. Unfortunately, they lack the necessary gray matter, aina?

I dunno, I've read the posts by plenty of dentists.  Can't be that hard.

Quote from: The Thing on November 13, 2024, 11:23:27 PMI feel like this is a bit of cherry-picking though. You could do the same thing with a lot of players..."just take out that 1 for 20 stretch and his numbers aren't bad".

True, but also a two way street.  Just yesterday Pak said that if you take out his good stretch he's a bad shooter. You can cherrypick stats to say just about anything. He's inconsistent, this is really nothing new, he's in a slump right now despite getting good looks. We all hope that he breaks that slump shortly.

Quote from: 1SE on November 14, 2024, 03:41:18 AMPlay with excluding this or that part of the sample, but fact remains dude is 32.4% career and 19% this year. Not terrible, but nowhere near what is needed to justify his other limitations. Plus, the line drive - not a shot built for 40%+.

But he's what we've got so I wish him all the best and hope he does shoot 36% this year - but he mostly is what he is - I'd be shocked if his game/shooting radically transforms at this point. I have no doubt he'll show up huge in a few games and knock down some major shots. But as a key and consistent part of the offense I don't see it. Thus, I think a better/more likely/more hopeful path to late season success is that we see the Freshman making big strides (which they may or may not do) and eat his minutes. My guess is our season will have been much more successful if the finally tally shows Ben at 15-20mpg rather than 20-25mpg.

 

This is a very good post, nicely done.

Agree with most all of it.
Definitely not a shot built for 40%+, not only because of its line drive nature, but more-so because it seems to be wildly inconsistent.
Oftentimes I'll think "wow that shot looked pretty good," only to thing "what the heck was that" on the immediate next shot, and vice versa.

He will show up huge in some games and hit some big shots to get Marquette a win, hopefully tomorrow is one.
I'd also be ecstatic if he managed to shoot over 35% from 3, but he is what we've got, and what Shaka has put a lot of time and effort into, and we should all want to wish him the best.

The end of your post suggests that he get partially lapped, which definitely has a decent probability if he continues to shoot sub 30% from range and doesn't diversify his game. Arguing that it would be good for the team overall is the part I never thought of before, but I'm tracking.
We will see how it all shapes up, but best case scenario would be Benny getting more of those "where did that come from, we need more of that" slams at the hoop, and then hope some of the other parts of his game follow suit

Quote from: DoctorV on November 14, 2024, 07:25:15 AMDefinitely not a shot built for 40%+, not only because of its line drive nature, but more-so because it seems to be wildly inconsistent.
Oftentimes I'll think "wow that shot looked pretty good," only to thing "what the heck was that" on the immediate next shot, and vice versa.

Yep. Mechanics aren't good/consistent enough. His release point tends to drift left and those are the real ugly misses.

With the lack of arc... I know major adjustments aren't made during the season. But I have also shot with the rebounding machines they use, and you can't shoot a flat ball and make it over those nets. I wonder if this is like a golfer who stripes it at the range but struggles on the course.

Quote from: DoctorV on November 14, 2024, 07:25:15 AMThis is a very good post, nicely done.

Agree with most all of it.
Definitely not a shot built for 40%+, not only because of its line drive nature, but more-so because it seems to be wildly inconsistent.
Oftentimes I'll think "wow that shot looked pretty good," only to thing "what the heck was that" on the immediate next shot, and vice versa.

He will show up huge in some games and hit some big shots to get Marquette a win, hopefully tomorrow is one.
I'd also be ecstatic if he managed to shoot over 35% from 3, but he is what we've got, and what Shaka has put a lot of time and effort into, and we should all want to wish him the best.

The end of your post suggests that he get partially lapped, which definitely has a decent probability if he continues to shoot sub 30% from range and doesn't diversify his game. Arguing that it would be good for the team overall is the part I never thought of before, but I'm tracking.
We will see how it all shapes up, but best case scenario would be Benny getting more of those "where did that come from, we need more of that" slams at the hoop, and then hope some of the other parts of his game follow suit

He shot well over 35% for three long stretches last season, which helps explain  Shaka's confidence in him.

And yes, MU could use one of those stretches starting tomorrow.

Quote from: MU82 on November 14, 2024, 10:04:21 AMHe shot well over 35% for three long stretches last season, which helps explain  Shaka's confidence in him.

And yes, MU could use one of those stretches starting tomorrow.

I think we can have all sorts of fun with Ben's numbers to make a case for or against his shooting.

For example, he went on a blistering four-game stretch in early March last season, shooting 7-for-8 from three over that span.
In his other 72 games at Marquette, he's a pretty meh 54-for-180 (30%).

If you really want to cringe, consider this:
In 5 career starts, Ben's taken 34 three-point shots (6.8 per game) and made six of them, i.e. 17.6%.
For comparison's sake, Kam averaged 6.5 three attempts per game last year and Jop averaged 5.5.


 

Quote from: Pakuni on November 14, 2024, 10:31:09 AMI think we can have all sorts of fun with Ben's numbers to make a case for or against his shooting.

For example, he went on a blistering four-game stretch in early March last season, shooting 7-for-8 from three over that span.
In his other 72 games at Marquette, he's a pretty meh 54-for-180 (30%).

If you really want to cringe, consider this:
In 5 career starts, Ben's taken 34 three-point shots (6.8 per game) and made six of them, i.e. 17.6%.
For comparison's sake, Kam averaged 6.5 three attempts per game last year and Jop averaged 5.5.


 

His 3-point stats as a starter are unimpressive, and that's a charitable description. It is a small sample size ... and offers lots of room for improvement!

I ran some simulations to examine a few questions.
1) What type of season long shooting percentage might we expect from someone who we think has a "true" 3PFG% of, say, 36%.
2) What is the probability of a season containing a 3-game slump with 19% shooting for a shooter with a "true" 36% 3PFG%.

Assumptions:
30 game season
Exactly 7 shots per game (BG's average so far) - I didn't sample this but could

Question 1:
In 10000 simulations, the minimum season long 3PFG% is 23.8%, max is 50.4% (see attached histogram).

Question 2:
Over 10000 simulations, there are 7442 3-game slumps with <=19% 3PFG%. Since these are not independent, I also looked at how many seasons would contain a slump, and that number is 42.3%.

Of course if your input 3PFG% is lower, you will get more slumps and more seasons with slumps.

Hopefully this can help inform this conversation.

Quote from: THRILLHO on November 14, 2024, 01:00:22 PMI ran some simulations to examine a few questions.
1) What type of season long shooting percentage might we expect from someone who we think has a "true" 3PFG% of, say, 36%.
2) What is the probability of a season containing a 3-game slump with 19% shooting for a shooter with a "true" 36% 3PFG%.

Assumptions:
30 game season
Exactly 7 shots per game (BG's average so far) - I didn't sample this but could

Question 1:
In 10000 simulations, the minimum season long 3PFG% is 23.8%, max is 50.4% (see attached histogram).

Question 2:
Over 10000 simulations, there are 7442 3-game slumps with <=19% 3PFG%. Since these are not independent, I also looked at how many seasons would contain a slump, and that number is 42.3%.

Of course if your input 3PFG% is lower, you will get more slumps and more seasons with slumps.

Hopefully this can help inform this conversation.

Wow. This is actually really cool.

Quote from: The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole on November 14, 2024, 01:59:57 PMWow. This is actually really cool.

Thanks! Does it make you freak out more or less about BG's shooting?

Even being trained to work with probabilities I found it a little surprising. It's really common for even decent shooters (BG is actually closer to 34% for his career before this year) who shoot a lot to go on 3 game slumps like the one BG is in.

Maybe the strongest pushback would be, "But how often is it at the start of the year?" For the record, 2.6% of the simulated seasons start with a slump. But I'm not sure that it matters. If it's at the end of the year, we say he's choking under pressure, if it's at the beginning of the year we say he's actually a bad shooter (despite 2 years of evidence that he's fine), but these are all just stories we tell to explain data that can just as easily be explained as normal amounts of variability in probabilistic sequences.

Quote from: THRILLHO on November 14, 2024, 03:59:34 PMThanks! Does it make you freak out more or less about BG's shooting?

Even being trained to work with probabilities I found it a little surprising. It's really common for even decent shooters (BG is actually closer to 34% for his career before this year) who shoot a lot to go on 3 game slumps like the one BG is in.

Maybe the strongest pushback would be, "But how often is it at the start of the year?" For the record, 2.6% of the simulated seasons start with a slump. But I'm not sure that it matters. If it's at the end of the year, we say he's choking under pressure, if it's at the beginning of the year we say he's actually a bad shooter (despite 2 years of evidence that he's fine), but these are all just stories we tell to explain data that can just as easily be explained as normal amounts of variability in probabilistic sequences.

I'm not really freaked out because at best I suspected marginal improvement, and he's just starting off in a slump. To me, Joplin and Gold are basically the same player. Decent, but not great shooters with average atheticism.

IMO Joplin is a better shooter than Gold.
Gold does not have much arch on his shot also seems to be rushing.

Quote from: NCMUFan on November 14, 2024, 04:47:24 PMIMO Joplin is a better shooter than Gold.
Gold does not have much arch on his shot also seems to be rushing.

Last year Ben had a higher 3% than Joplin. I don't think they are far off from one another.