dylans said:
@jaybate-1-0 what if 41% was the trough that KU climbs out of the rest of the games, peaking in about 4 games?
It is possible statistically speaking.
The right and left tails of distributions exist to account for such anomalies.
Teams have gotten hot for six games. KU could have gotten hot for the previous 6-7 games (trough to trough so to speak) and then get hot for another 4 games. Its is possible.
Having allowed for the statistically possible, then it is worth considering what would be implied, if 41% were the trough in a tendency, rather than in an anomaly in a right tail of the distribution.
The first trough was 19% followed by a peak of 55%.
The second trough was 35% followed by a peak of 55%.
The third trough, according to your what if, would be 41%, and let's assume it too will be followed by a 55% peak.
This implies the team is becoming a rapidly improving three point shooting team down the stretch of the season. Why?
Well, we know it is not the format. Most of the conference season, KU played 2 in 3 or 2 in 4 formats separated by about a week, same as in the March Carney.
Are a lot of our perimeter players' outside shooting mechanics being changed, or dialed in, by the coaches? Well, I see no sign of any perimeter player's shooting mechanics changing, do you?
Are our perimeter players legs getting healthier, or are our perimeter players getting more rest? No and no appear reasonable answers.
Are our perimeter players getting better shots? Hmmmmmm. Now there is an interesting possibility. Out of the last three games in the conference tourney, two were played agains lesser teams. Out of the two teams played in the first round, one sucked (Penn) and one (Seton) was no better than a bottom half of the Big 12 type team. This leads one to suspect that our impressive shooting has been produced by two factors converging.
First, there is the shooting cycle contribution. Our shooting cycles do rise and fall and rise again. The last few games, we were beginning a decline phase, but it has not gotten as deep as the usual decline phase for a reason.
Second, that reason is the relatively weak competition in the first round of the tournament.
So: I will throw the what ifs back to you now.
What if 41% against Seton would have been much lower against a team of at least the quality of the upper level of the Big12? And what if KU meets a team at least as good as one of the top 3-4 teams in the Big 12 either game in Round 2? What if the combination of KU being in a down cycle, probably even hitting a trough in the first of the two game sets, coincides with KU encountering a team as good as, or perhaps even slightly better than, one of the top 4 teams in the B12? Is it possible KU could trough between 19 and 35% from beyond the trey stripe?