I think we have different perspectives on what is a good shooting percentage. This is kinda how I break it down:thedynasty1998;604278 wrote:That's actually not that bad of a shooting percentage.
se-alum;604289 wrote:I think we have different perspectives on what is a good shooting percentage. This is kinda how I break it down:
30% and below = Not Good
31%-35% = Average
36%-40% = Above Average
41%-44% = Good
45%+ = Great
Buford and Lighty aren't shooting bad averages, but certainly not anything that would make the other team focus on not allowing those two to get outside shots.
FatHobbit;604317 wrote:Something I just read that was interesting. There are 47 players in the history of OSU basketball that have scored 1000 points. Three of them (Buford, Lighty and Diebler) are playing this year. Of course Lighty had 5 years to do it, but it's still pretty impressive IMO.
Yea, Lighty will only end up w/ 7 extra games.lhslep134;604328 wrote:Lighty having 5 years has nothing to do with it considering you only get 4 years of eligiblity unless you're injured.
Um, yes, Diebler is a "pretty good" outside shooter. He's inconsistent at times. He's a good shooter, but lets not act like he lights the nets on fire or anything. So tell me, what exactly was "nonsense"? Are you saying Diebler is a good defender, or rebounder, or anything else I mentioned?Writerbuckeye;604077 wrote:More nonsense about Diebler not based in fact. A "pretty good" outside shooter? LOL. He's almost a lock to end up as the Big Ten's all-time leading 3 point scorer, and his percentage of made 3 pointers has risen every season, and that percentage is better than most. As for his ball handling skills or ability to create...THAT'S NOT HIS ROLE ON THE TEAM. And why would you compare a PG to a SG or wing player? They aren't supposed to do the same things. Not every player needs to be able to do everything. In Matta's system he has specialists that blend together and create a team very difficult to beat.
It amazes me how many fans watch basketball but have so little understanding of the team concept and players having specific roles on that team. Perhaps it's an NBA mentality where you see so much more one on one play.
thedynasty1998;603923 wrote:
I don't believe that. OSU could lose any of those four and still be a top 10 team. Obviously it would hurt the team, but to say Sullinger doesn't have more value than those four is just wrong. And to say that one player doesn't determine how far this team goes, would you say the same thing last year? No. Well I would argue that Sullinger has just as much value as Turner did, if not more.
Jester;604411 wrote:Um, yes, Diebler is a "pretty good" outside shooter. He's inconsistent at times. He's a good shooter, but lets not act like he lights the nets on fire or anything. So tell me, what exactly was "nonsense"? Are you saying Diebler is a good defender, or rebounder, or anything else I mentioned?
Of course any teams would have a problem if their 2 best big men got in foul trouble. I was more pointing out that Sullinger and Lauderdale are the only 2 big men we really have that we can depend on. I mean yeah, I suppose you could slide Lighty and Thomas down there, but they only go 6'5 and 6'6 respectively. Which would leave them in a very tough position if going against a team with decent big men. Teams like Michigan State and Minnesota can go 3-4 deep or more if need to. Could pose problems for OSU.Big Gain;603772 wrote:Thomas is doing a very nice job playing the 4 spot, you completely forgot about him in your supposition. He's scoring in double figures and is 2nd on the team in rebounds/minutes played. ANY team would have a problem if their 2 best big men were in foul trouble at the same time. DUH!
The first seven can be counted on in just about any situation, now that Thomas has learned he's not supposed to shoot every time he touches the ball. When Sibert plays, his only job is not to do something stupid. In a close game that's it and is MORE than sufficient. How soon we forget how short the bench was last year.
Writerbuckeye;604077 wrote:More nonsense about Diebler not based in fact. A "pretty good" outside shooter? LOL. He's almost a lock to end up as the Big Ten's all-time leading 3 point scorer, and his percentage of made 3 pointers has risen every season, and that percentage is better than most. As for his ball handling skills or ability to create...THAT'S NOT HIS ROLE ON THE TEAM. And why would you compare a PG to a SG or wing player? They aren't supposed to do the same things. Not every player needs to be able to do everything. In Matta's system he has specialists that blend together and create a team very difficult to beat.
It amazes me how many fans watch basketball but have so little understanding of the team concept and players having specific roles on that team. Perhaps it's an NBA mentality where you see so much more one on one play.
Big Gain;604754 wrote:BRAVO!
I found an interesting stat about Diebler on StatSheet Network. If you look under "Player Stats" and click on (more), you will see several categories, one of which is called "Offensive Rating". Diebler has the 3rd highest "Offensive Rating" in the country at 147.82, just behind #2 Griffin Callahan from SDSU who has a 148.49. Duke's Andre Dawkins is 4th with a 147.35 and UCONN's Kemba Walker is 7th with 141.31.
Hb31187;604885 wrote:It kinda sounds like that dumb PER rating in the NBA
Pierce Hornung from Colorado State.Tiger2003;604872 wrote:Who is #1?
Hb31187;604885 wrote:what exactly goes into an "offensive rating" statistic. It kinda sounds like that dumb PER rating in the NBA
