Iowa St. 2/13 7:00 ESPN2

[SKell82155]

This was only the second time this season that our offense let us down, with the loss at Baylor being the first. We only put up 0.88 points per possession, by far our lowest output of the season. It's hard to win a basketball game against anyone when you turn it over more than one of every three possessions. But we were also very inefficient from the field, converting only 10 of 27 shots inside the arc. Good three point shooting is the only thing that kept us in the game.

Defensively we did ok, holding Iowa St to 1.02 points per possession. We shut down Gilbert and Momcilovic, and did a decent job on Lipsey. None of those guys were very efficient. But we got beat by Curtis Jones on the wing and Robert Jones inside.

Player of the game was Skillings by a mile. He had 8 net points and a whopping 19 box plus minus, both far better than anyone on either team. He filled up the stat sheet with 11 boards, 3 assists, 2 steals, 2 blocks, and zero turnovers to go with his 13 points. Jizzle and Simas were the only other players contributing positive net points. Day Day and Aziz killed us, combining for negative 10 net points, essentially accounting for the final scoring margin. They had 10 turnovers and zero assists between them.

Like others here, I think we need to change our starting lineup. It's imperative to get guys who can create offense out there. Whatever Vik's issue is, he is not contributing anything on the offensive end right now, and Aziz is strictly a receiving scorer. Skillings and Jamille can create their own offense. I think those two need to be the starting frontcourt. Jizzle, Newman, Simas, Skillings, and Jamille led the team in minutes tonight, so we may be headed that way. We're getting torched right now with Aziz and Vik out there together. We scored only 2 points in the 4 minute segments to start each half, and both baskets were midrange jumpers by our PGs. We got nothing offensively from our starting 5 man unit.

Thanks for your insightful posts !
Question- why do coaches (essentially all that
I’ve seen) start the 2nd half with the original
starting lineup even if it wasn’t productive ?

[Bearcat93]

When it comes down to it, basketball is a statistical game. There are no points for style. The goal is strictly to outscore the opponent, and our eyes can easily deceive us as to what works and what doesn't. For example, you're saying Ody is better at the rim than Aziz. Ody is shooting 61% at the rim this season. Aziz makes 71%. Regardless of who we think is better, Aziz makes more shots around the basket than Ody does. And you're right about Aziz having no offense away from the rim. He's only attempted 13 other shots all season, but that's a good thing if you're not efficient there. Ody is the same way. He has no offense outside the paint either.

Defense is a little tougher because there aren't as many individual stats. But Aziz is a way better rebounder - he grabs 26% of opponent misses compared to Ody's 18%. Aziz also blocks shots at a higher rate than Ody. No one on our team fouls more than Ody. And going to intangibles is where the advance stats come in. Opponents score more when Ody is on the floor than Aziz or Skillings.

This isn't to say that Ody shouldn't be able to earn his way back onto the court. It's just that there isn't a statistical argument for more playing time. It's perfectly fine to argue for other reasons and leave out the stats. But to imply that the coaching staff isn't doing analytics because they aren't playing Ody is way off base.

This is pretty much what I see as a Wes weakness - putting the best players on the court at the right times. Beyond statistics, there's other factors that influence a player's production - this is where eyes beat stats all day long.

[sedz]

Thanks for your insightful posts !
Question- why do coaches (essentially all that
I’ve seen) start the 2nd half with the original
starting lineup even if it wasn’t productive ?

The short answer is they have plays drawn up before the game that they use with that lineup. Some coaches like to stick with the same lineup repeatedly so they can use the same sets, even if they immediately switch it up at the first media timeout. We saw that against Iowa St as Vik started both halves but only played 9 minutes while Skillings came off the bench to play 32.

Beyond that, coaches are trying to manage a bunch of young amateur athletes who are emotional beings. We even see professionals get upset or dejected about lineup changes, especially in baseball with batting orders or closer roles. Coaching big time college basketball is a tough job with a lot of duties. On top of strategy they have to handle team chemistry, recruiting, development, media relations, and even marketing for things like new facilities. So from the perspective of a fan who's into analytics, I would have adjusted the lineup a long time ago. But I don't have the level of knowledge or responsibility that Wes has so I can only speculate.

[Rufus]

Regardless of the reasoning behind the decisions on who starts and who does not, Viks regression is serious and doesnt look to be corrected any time soon. To salvage any chance to participate in any post season tourney's You have to start building chemistry with someone who is going to put forth effort, get you some rebounds and produce more than zero pts a game. Reynolds can't produce when given only 4-5 minute increments. At the risk of being called a hater sit Lahkin now and give his minutes to Reynolds. Bring Ody in to spell Jamille but you have to go with the bull not the ghost from here on out. Yea he's going to make some mistakes but at least he won't shy away from the opponents. They will at least know he was in the game.

[leo from jersey]

A competitive team desires winning above all. You deal with personal situations off the court and not on the court. In this day of individualism on the court, a team playing together often still wins on the court. I do see some of that with who all sat the second half at the end. With CJ getting more minutes, I see that as what CWM is doing. Winning makes all the situations better for the team. UC has plenty of professional help for those who need it. We as fans expect that.

[leeraymond]

When it comes down to it, basketball is a statistical game. There are no points for style. The goal is strictly to outscore the opponent, and our eyes can easily deceive us as to what works and what doesn't. For example, you're saying Ody is better at the rim than Aziz. Ody is shooting 61% at the rim this season. Aziz makes 71%. Regardless of who we think is better, Aziz makes more shots around the basket than Ody does. And you're right about Aziz having no offense away from the rim. He's only attempted 13 other shots all season, but that's a good thing if you're not efficient there. Ody is the same way. He has no offense outside the paint either.

Defense is a little tougher because there aren't as many individual stats. But Aziz is a way better rebounder - he grabs 26% of opponent misses compared to Ody's 18%. Aziz also blocks shots at a higher rate than Ody. No one on our team fouls more than Ody. And going to intangibles is where the advance stats come in. Opponents score more when Ody is on the floor than Aziz or Skillings.

This isn't to say that Ody shouldn't be able to earn his way back onto the court. It's just that there isn't a statistical argument for more playing time. It's perfectly fine to argue for other reasons and leave out the stats. But to imply that the coaching staff isn't doing analytics because they aren't playing Ody is way off base.

First of all, let's point out where you are correct. Aziz is a better shot blocker and rebounder than Oguama, based on the numbers. He should be. He is 7"0' and Oguama is 6"7 /6"8. He also plays about 23 /24 minutes a game. Oguama right now is only playing about 3.6 minutes a game. I will not mention Skillings because he plays a different position all together. Also, Skillings is not as big of a problem as Aziz. Here is where you are confused. Aziz fouls about 2.18 times / game. Oguama (when he plays) fouls about 1.35 times / game. Also, Aziz turns the ball over more than Oguama (1.1 / game to .35 / game).

Regarding the scoring with either Oguama or Aziz in the game, this is more difficult to measure because 1) Oguama has NOT really played since the non-conference season. Thus, there are not enough current data to go on; 2) Aziz has only played in 16 games this season because of eligibility and injury issues; 3) except for the non-conference games, there are no other games to truly compare the individual scoring impacts of Ody and Aziz on UC's final game scores. I will look at the non-conference average scores, then the conference average scores.

With Oguama, UC scored 81.8 points / game and gave up 60.2 points / game. With Aziz, UC scored 77 points / game and gave up 81.5 points / game. Note that with Aziz, this only included 2 (two) non-conference games (Howard and Dayton). He missed a lot of non-conference games because of eligibility and injury issues.

In conference play, Oguama has NOT played (3.6 minutes / game). Aziz has played in 10 of the 11 games. Here are the conference numbers: UC is scoring 67.9 points / game and is giving up 68.09 points a game. The only conference game that Aziz did NOT play in (Baylor), UC scored 59 points and gave up 62 points.

You say basketball is statistical. That has truth to it. However, basketball is also a game of teamwork, chemistry, and coaching. I think that UC has a better chance to win when Oguama plays significant minutes. Think about this for a minute, the only game that UC has lost this year when Oguama played 15 or more minutes was Xavier. Every other game they won. Oguama has NOT played during the conference season. Look at UC's conference record 4-7. Also, UC has lost 7 of its last 10 games. Clearly, something is NOT going right. What do your stats tell you?

[Jeff Burk]

First of all, let's point out where you are correct. Aziz is a better shot blocker and rebounder than Oguama, based on the numbers. He should be. He is 7"0' and Oguama is 6"7 /6"8. He also plays about 23 /24 minutes a game. Oguama right now is only playing about 3.6 minutes a game. I will not mention Skillings because he plays a different position all together. Also, Skillings is not as big of a problem as Aziz. Here is where you are confused. Aziz fouls about 2.18 times / game. Oguama (when he plays) fouls about 1.35 times / game. Also, Aziz turns the ball over more than Oguama (1.1 / game to .35 / game).

Regarding the scoring with either Oguama or Aziz in the game, this is more difficult to measure because 1) Oguama has NOT really played since the non-conference season. Thus, there are not enough current data to go on; 2) Aziz has only played in 16 games this season because of eligibility and injury issues; 3) except for the non-conference games, there are no other games to truly compare the individual scoring impacts of Ody and Aziz on UC's final game scores. I will look at the non-conference average scores, then the conference average scores.

With Oguama, UC scored 81.8 points / game and gave up 60.2 points / game. With Aziz, UC scored 77 points / game and gave up 81.5 points / game. Note that with Aziz, this only included 2 (two) non-conference games (Howard and Dayton). He missed a lot of non-conference games because of eligibility and injury issues.

In conference play, Oguama has NOT played (3.6 minutes / game). Aziz has played in 10 of the 11 games. Here are the conference numbers: UC is scoring 67.9 points / game and is giving up 68.09 points a game. The only conference game that Aziz did NOT play in (Baylor), UC scored 59 points and gave up 62 points.

You say basketball is statistical. That has truth to it. However, basketball is also a game of teamwork, chemistry, and coaching. I think that UC has a better chance to win when Oguama plays significant minutes. Think about this for a minute, the only game that UC has lost this year when Oguama played 15 or more minutes was Xavier. Every other game they won. Oguama has NOT played during the conference season. Look at UC's conference record 4-7. Also, UC has lost 7 of its last 10 games. Clearly, something is NOT going right. What do your stats tell you?

Our non conference schedule had no ranked opponents at the time although Dayton is now ranked but our conference schedule included 9 ranked opponents so that is not a good comparison. I really like Ody but would rather have Aziz in the game

[sedz]

First of all, let's point out where you are correct. Aziz is a better shot blocker and rebounder than Oguama, based on the numbers. He should be. He is 7"0' and Oguama is 6"7 /6"8. He also plays about 23 /24 minutes a game. Oguama right now is only playing about 3.6 minutes a game. Here is where you are confused. Aziz fouls about 2.18 times / game. Oguama (when he plays) fouls about 1.35 times / game. Also, Aziz turns the ball over more than Oguama (1.1 / game to .35 / game).

Regarding the scoring with either Oguama or Aziz in the game, this is more difficult to measure because 1) Oguama has NOT really played since the non-conference season. Thus, are not enough current data to go on; 2) Aziz has only played in 16 games this season because of eligibility and injury issues; 3) except for the non-conference games, there are no other games to truly compare the individual scoring impacts of Ody and Aziz on UC's final game scores. I will look at the non-conference average scores, then the conference average scores.

With Oguama, UC scored 81.8 points / game and gave up 60.2 points / game. With Aziz, UC scored 77 points / game and gave up 81.5 points / game. Note that with Aziz, this only included 2 (two) non-conference games (Howard and Dayton). He missed a lot of non-conference games because of eligibility and injury issues.

In conference play, Oguama has NOT played (3.6 minutes / game). Aziz has played in 10 of the 11 games. Here are the conference numbers: UC is scoring 67.9 points / game and is giving up 68.09 points a game. The only conference game that Aziz did NOT play in (Baylor), UC scored 59 points and gave up 62 points.

You say basketball is statistical. That has truth to it. However, basketball is also a game of teamwork, chemistry, and coaching. Let's agree to disagree. I think that UC has a better chance to win when Oguama plays significant minutes. Think about this for a minute, the only game that UC has lost this year when Oguama plays 15 or more minutes is Xavier. Every other game they won. Oguama has NOT played during the conference season. Look at UC's conference record 4-7. Also, UC has lost 7 of its last 10 games. Clearly, something is NOT going right. What your stats tell you?

It's time to graduate to rate stats. Per game numbers don't really tell you anything because as you point out, Aziz and Ody don't play the same minutes. Rate stats are per possession, per minute, or per shot faced. Aziz fouls 3.7 times per 40 minutes. Ody fouls 4.9 times per 40 minutes. Ody's foul rate is much higher than Aziz. Ody does turn it over less than Aziz (13% of possessions compared to 18%). But Aziz is a far better rebounder and is better offensively and defensively at the rim.

I'm not sure what you're getting at with the rest of your post. Even putting aside the Aziz vs Ody debate, our out of conference performance was worse than our Big 12 performance. We went 11-2 out of conference, but it was against a terrible schedule and we lost both of our big games. Going 4-7 in Big 12 play with 3 wins over tournament teams is what has us on the bubble.

Comparing team scoring, at a minimum you need to look at plus/minus rather than final score, otherwise you're including a bunch of possessions when the player you want to analyze isn't even on the court. Raw plus/minus still has issues because there are 9 other players on the floor that influence the score. Box plus minus combines a player's rate stats with plus/minus to get a better idea of how just that individual is impacting the score when he's on the floor. Evan Miya's BPR takes those numbers and adjusts them for strength of schedule. And then net points takes the actual final scoring margin and uses box plus minus to determine what each player's share is. Each of these steps gets us closer to an accurate measure of how a player impacted a game.

Teamwork, chemistry, coaching, skills, conditioning, competitive drive, crowd energy, and all sorts of other factors contribute to what happens on the court. Statistics measure the end result of all that. The game can be boiled down to four numbers (Dean Oliver's Four Factors): 1) effective field goal percentage 2) turnover rate 3) rebounding rate 4) free throws. Regardless of what our eyes tell us, the final score is a direct result of those statistics. All of the intangibles that go into a basketball game end up producing a statistical result, and that's ultimately what matters.

Ody hasn't given us as good of results as other players. Of course he can change that if given the opportunity. Wes would need to be convinced in practice that he has become a better player than he was earlier this year (or ever in his career - Ody never had a positive box plus minus in his first four seasons). If he hasn't, then it makes sense to stick with the guys who have produced better results.

[leeraymond]

Our non conference schedule had no ranked opponents at the time although Dayton is now ranked but our conference schedule included 9 ranked opponents so that is not a good comparison. I really like Ody but would rather have Aziz in the game

You are correct. The schedule was not as tough during the non-conference. However, Oguama is just a better defender than Aziz, especially on the perimeter. It is too easy to score on Aziz. He typically plays about 6 or 7 feet off his man. Also, because does not play good positional defense, he tries to block every shot. This causes him to fall for the pump-fake all of the time. Did you see the Dayton game? How about the Houston game? It was embarrassing how badly Aziz was outplayed in those games. Aziz does not fully understand how North American basketball is played and it shows. God bless him. The poor guy cannot even shoot the ball unless he is at the free-throw line. Why do you think the guards will only feed Aziz ally-oop passes? Because he has no low post moves. You would think that the coaching staff would teach him a jump hook. With his size, who would block it?

I like Aziz. He is an amazing shot blocker at the rim (very quick off his feet). He is also a pretty good rebounder if no one is putting a body on him. However, he should be coming off the bench and play against the other team's second-string players. There are 7 games left. Let's see what happens.

[leo from jersey]

It's time to graduate to rate stats. Per game numbers don't really tell you anything because as you point out, Aziz and Ody don't play the same minutes. Rate stats are per possession, per minute, or per shot faced. Aziz fouls 3.7 times per 40 minutes. Ody fouls 4.9 times per 40 minutes. Ody's foul rate is much higher than Aziz. Ody does turn it over less than Aziz (13% of possessions compared to 18%). But Aziz is a far better rebounder and is better offensively and defensively at the rim.

I'm not sure what you're getting at with the rest of your post. Even putting aside the Aziz vs Ody debate, our out of conference performance was worse than our Big 12 performance. We went 11-2 out of conference, but it was against a terrible schedule and we lost both of our big games. Going 4-7 in Big 12 play with 3 wins over tournament teams is what has us on the bubble.

Comparing team scoring, at a minimum you need to look at plus/minus rather than final score, otherwise you're including a bunch of possessions when the player you want to analyze isn't even on the court. Raw plus/minus still has issues because there are 9 other players on the floor that influence the score. Box plus minus combines a player's rate stats with plus/minus to get a better idea of how just that individual is impacting the score when he's on the floor. Evan Miya's BPR takes those numbers and adjusts them for strength of schedule. And then net points takes the actual final scoring margin and uses box plus minus to determine what each player's share is. Each of these steps gets us closer to an accurate measure of how a player impacted a game.

Teamwork, chemistry, coaching, skills, conditioning, competitive drive, crowd energy, and all sorts of other factors contribute to what happens on the court. Statistics measure the end result of all that. The game can be boiled down to four numbers (Dean Oliver's Four Factors): 1) effective field goal percentage 2) turnover rate 3) rebounding rate 4) free throws. Regardless of what our eyes tell us, the final score is a direct result of those statistics. All of the intangibles that go into a basketball game end up producing a statistical result, and that's ultimately what matters.

Ody hasn't given us as good of results as other players. Of course he can change that if given the opportunity. Wes would need to be convinced in practice that he has become a better player than he was earlier this year (or ever in his career - Ody never had a positive box plus minus in his first four seasons). If he hasn't, then it makes sense to stick with the guys who have produced better results.

A major factor that you alluded to (all sorts of other factors) to me are the shots missed or not taken due to quality defense or lack of confidence. Those are major factors. but really can't be quantified. Perhaps if they could be, some of the players might have better ratings. The eye still holds some advantage over stats.

[leeraymond]

It's time to graduate to rate stats. Per game numbers don't really tell you anything because as you point out, Aziz and Ody don't play the same minutes. Rate stats are per possession, per minute, or per shot faced. Aziz fouls 3.7 times per 40 minutes. Ody fouls 4.9 times per 40 minutes. Ody's foul rate is much higher than Aziz. Ody does turn it over less than Aziz (13% of possessions compared to 18%). But Aziz is a far better rebounder and is better offensively and defensively at the rim.

I'm not sure what you're getting at with the rest of your post. Even putting aside the Aziz vs Ody debate, our out of conference performance was worse than our Big 12 performance. We went 11-2 out of conference, but it was against a terrible schedule and we lost both of our big games. Going 4-7 in Big 12 play with 3 wins over tournament teams is what has us on the bubble.

Comparing team scoring, at a minimum you need to look at plus/minus rather than final score, otherwise you're including a bunch of possessions when the player you want to analyze isn't even on the court. Raw plus/minus still has issues because there are 9 other players on the floor that influence the score. Box plus minus combines a player's rate stats with plus/minus to get a better idea of how just that individual is impacting the score when he's on the floor. Evan Miya's BPR takes those numbers and adjusts them for strength of schedule. And then net points takes the actual final scoring margin and uses box plus minus to determine what each player's share is. Each of these steps gets us closer to an accurate measure of how a player impacted a game.

Teamwork, chemistry, coaching, skills, conditioning, competitive drive, crowd energy, and all sorts of other factors contribute to what happens on the court. Statistics measure the end result of all that. The game can be boiled down to four numbers (Dean Oliver's Four Factors): 1) effective field goal percentage 2) turnover rate 3) rebounding rate 4) free throws. Regardless of what our eyes tell us, the final score is a direct result of those statistics. All of the intangibles that go into a basketball game end up producing a statistical result, and that's ultimately what matters.

Ody hasn't given us as good of results as other players. Of course he can change that if given the opportunity. Wes would need to be convinced in practice that he has become a better player than he was earlier this year (or ever in his career - Ody never had a positive box plus minus in his first four seasons). If he hasn't, then it makes sense to stick with the guys who have produced better results.

I understand what you are saying. The rate stats are fine. However, the bottom line is WINS AND LOSES. Coaches do not get fired for bad rate stats, they get fired for too many loses and not enough wins. Look at what happened to the coach at Ohio State. That guy is a very good coach. However, he had two bad years where he lost more games than he won. The officials at OSU decided he had to go. They did not even have the decency to wait until the season was over with to fire him. A team does not get to the NCAA tournament on rate stats, they get there by wins and losses. Of course, strength of schedule, quadrant 1 and 2 wins, wins over ranked opponents, etc. all play a role. Still winning games is the most important thing. In order to win the NCAA championship, a team must WIN 6 straight games without a LOSS.

I think where we differ is that you are looking at the process and I am looking at the end result. That is what I believe in. Who cares how you win as long as you win. I do not have any evidence to back this up, but my guess is Cronin's Cincinnati teams probably had horrible rate stats on offense. Nevertheless, they still found a way to win most of their games. No coach has ever gotten fired for bad rate stats, but many coaches have been fired for a bad win / loss record.

By the way, per game stats tell you what happens per game. Each contest is played one game at a time. Per game stats tell you what a player is likely to do, on average, each game. That is probably the most important information on player performance that you can have.

[sedz]

A major factor that you alluded to (all sorts of other factors) to me are the shots missed or not taken due to quality defense or lack of confidence. Those are major factors. but really can't be quantified. Perhaps if they could be, some of the players might have better ratings. The eye still holds some advantage over stats.

It's quantified by usage rate. Players who are afraid to shoot or for whatever reason are not putting up shots will take fewer than their equal share - they will end less than 20% of possessions when they are on the floor. This is something I stated in this thread as being a major problem for our offense right now. With Vik disappearing, we're relying way too much on our PGs for scoring. Their usage rates are through the roof. Newman and Jamille need to step up and fill the void. The eye and stats work together to identify problems and come up with solutions.

[leo from jersey]

It's quantified by usage rate. Players who are afraid to shoot or for whatever reason are not putting up shots will take fewer than their equal share - they will end less than 20% of possessions when they are on the floor. This is something I stated in this thread as being a major problem for our offense right now. With Vik disappearing, we're relying way too much on our PGs for scoring. Their usage rates are through the roof. Newman and Jamille need to step up and fill the void. The eye and stats work together to identify problems and come up with solutions.

That is still a very hard thing to gauge. I appreciate the numbers though and I agree. It is hard to quantify heart though.

[sedz]

I understand what you are saying. The rate stats are fine. However, the bottom line is WINS AND LOSES. Coaches do not get fired for bad rate stats, they get fired for too many loses and not enough wins. Look at what happened to the coach at Ohio State. That guy is a very good coach. However, he had two bad years where he lost more games than he won. The officials at OSU decided he had to go. They did not even have the decency to wait until the season was over with to fire him. A team does not get to the NCAA tournament on rate stats, they get there by wins and losses. Of course, strength of schedule, quadrant 1 and 2 wins, wins over ranked opponents, etc. all play a role. Still winning games is the most important thing. In order to win the NCAA championship, a team must WIN 6 straight games without a LOSS.

I think where we differ is that you are looking at the process and I am looking at the end result. That is what I believe in. Who cares how you win as long as you win. I do not have any evidence to back this up, but my guess is Cronin's Cincinnati teams probably had horrible rate stats on offense. Nevertheless, they still found a way to win most of their games. No coach has ever gotten fired for bad rate stats, but many coaches have been fired for a bad win / loss record.

Stats are a tool to help coaches come up with strategies to win games. They are actionable and predictive. Fans say things like we "don't know how to win". What does that mean practically? How do you change it? Not long ago people were clamoring for Day Day and Jizzle to play together. Now, just a week or two later, fans have decided our PGs don't know how to play basketball. This stuff is all very reactionary and short term. Day Day was our best player against Texas Tech and had one of his worst games against Iowa St. It happens.

Rate stats show that Ohio St is the 68th best team in the country (per kenpom). That's why they have 11 losses. This is the 4th straight year they have been worse than the previous season. That's why Holtmann was fired. Ohio State's expectations are much higher.

In 2018 Cronin had the 5th best team in the country per rate stats with an offense ranked #56. His best offense was the previous year with Caupain at PG, coming in at #31.

Last year UConn lost 8 regular season games, more than many other teams. So they got a 4 seed. But they entered the tournament as the 4th best team in the country per rate stats. Part of what makes the NCAA tournament so fun is the randomness of single elimination. Anything can happen in a single game. But having the most efficient team possible will increase your odds of winning every game.

I look at process because that's what a coach has control over going into a game. And then I look at results to modify the process for the next game. This is how every coach operates. Always looking to improve the process regardless of the team's record in previous games.

[leo from jersey]

Stats are a tool to help coaches come up with strategies to win games. They are actionable and predictive. Fans say things like we "don't know how to win". What does that mean practically? How do you change it? Not long ago people were clamoring for Day Day and Jizzle to play together. Now, just a week or two later, fans have decided our PGs don't know how to play basketball. This stuff is all very reactionary and short term. Day Day was our best player against Texas Tech and had one of his worst games against Iowa St. It happens.

.

they don't know how to play PG. JJ was the best as a BB player as he basically played the off. Is there a stat for bringing the ball up with your head down? I am not against him as I do believe he has a great future. The future is get a floor leader and let JJ destroy defenses.